Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6
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
Re: postgres_fdw bug in 9.6 (Ashutosh Bapat)
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: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Дата: