Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
Искать
От
Etsuro Fujita
Тема
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6
Дата
Msg-id
424933d7-d6bb-4b8f-4e44-1fea212af083@lab.ntt.co.jp
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ryan Murphy <ryanfmurphy@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ryan Murphy <ryanfmurphy@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Re: [HACKERS] postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
On 2017/04/04 14:38, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Probably we should use "could not be created" instead of "was not
> created" in "... a local path suitable for EPQ checks was not created".

Done.

> "outer_path should not require relations from inner_path" may be
> reworded as "outer paths should not be parameterized by the inner
> relations".
>
> "neither path should require relations from the other path" may be
> reworded as "neither path should be parameterized by the the other
> joining relation".

Done.  I used "input" instead of "joining" in the latter, though.

>         Why JOIN_RIGHT is being treated differently from JOIN_LEFT? We
>         should be able
>         to create a nested loop join for JOIN_RIGHT?
>         +        case JOIN_RIGHT:
>         +        case JOIN_FULL:
>
>
>     I don't think so, because nestloop joins aren't supported for
>     JOIN_RIGHT.  See ExecInitNestLoop().
>
>
> Hmm, I see in match_unsorted_outer()
> 1254         case JOIN_RIGHT:
> 1255         case JOIN_FULL:
> 1256             nestjoinOK = false;
> 1257             useallclauses = true;
> 1258             break;

Yeah, I should have pointed that out as well.

I rebased the patch also.  Please find attached an updated version of 
the patch.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Amit Langote
Дата:
От: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Дата:
FAQ