Re: postgres_fdw: batch inserts vs. before row triggers
| От | Etsuro Fujita |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: postgres_fdw: batch inserts vs. before row triggers |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAPmGK17rmXEY3BL=Aq71L8UZv5f-mz=uxJkz1kMnfSSY+pFe-A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: postgres_fdw: batch inserts vs. before row triggers (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: postgres_fdw: batch inserts vs. before row triggers
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 12:11 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com> writes: > > On Sat, Nov 26, 2022 at 1:57 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> Couldn't we add the field to ModifyTableState, instead? > > > We could probably do so, but I thought having a global list would be > > more efficient to handle pending buffered inserts than that. > > OK, as long as there's a reason for doing it that way, it's OK > by me. I don't think that adding a field at the end of EState > is an ABI problem. > > We have to do something else than add to ResultRelInfo, though. OK, I removed from ResultRelInfo a field that I added in the commit to save the owning ModifyTableState if insert-pending, and added to EState another List member to save such ModifyTableStates, instead. I am planning to apply this to not only back branches but HEAD, to make back-patching easy, if there are no objections. Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: