On 2016/02/15 15:20, Rushabh Lathia wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Etsuro Fujita
> <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp <mailto:fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>> wrote:
> As a result of our discussions, we reached a conclusion that the DML
> pushdown APIs should be provided together with existing APIs such as
> ExecForeignInsert, ExecForeignUpdate or ExecForeignDelete, IIUC.
> So, how about (1) leaving the description for the existing APIs
> as-is and (2) adding a new description for the DML pushdown APIs in
> parenthesis, like this?:
>
> If the <function>IsForeignRelUpdatable</> pointer is set to
> <literal>NULL</>, foreign tables are assumed to be insertable,
> updatable,
> or deletable if the FDW provides <function>ExecForeignInsert</>,
> <function>ExecForeignUpdate</>, or <function>ExecForeignDelete</>
> respectively.
> (If the FDW attempts to optimize a foreign table update, it still
> needs to provide PlanDMLPushdown, BeginDMLPushdown,
> IterateDMLPushdown and EndDMLPushdown.)
>
> Actually, if the FDW provides the DML pushdown APIs, (pushdown-able)
> foreign table updates can be done without ExecForeignInsert,
> ExecForeignUpdate or ExecForeignDelete. So, the above docs are not
> necessarily correct. But we don't recommend to do that without the
> existing APIs, so I'm not sure it's worth complicating the docs.
> Adding a new description for DML pushdown API seems good idea. I would
> suggest to add that as separate paragraph rather then into brackets.
OK, will do.
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita