Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Add FDW documentation notes about insert and update tuple routing and COPY.

  2. Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.

  1. pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> — 2018-04-06T23:24:33Z

    Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.

Also enable this for postgres_fdw.

Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.

Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp

Branch
------
master

Details
-------
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/3d956d9562aa4811b5eaaaf5314d361c61be2ae0

Modified Files
--------------
contrib/file_fdw/input/file_fdw.source         |   5 +
contrib/file_fdw/output/file_fdw.source        |   9 +-
contrib/postgres_fdw/expected/postgres_fdw.out | 334 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_fdw.c            |  96 +++++++
contrib/postgres_fdw/sql/postgres_fdw.sql      | 237 ++++++++++++++++++
doc/src/sgml/ddl.sgml                          |   8 +-
doc/src/sgml/fdwhandler.sgml                   |  66 +++++
doc/src/sgml/ref/copy.sgml                     |   5 +-
doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml                   |   3 +
src/backend/commands/copy.c                    |  96 +++++--
src/backend/executor/execMain.c                |   8 +-
src/backend/executor/execPartition.c           | 103 +++++---
src/backend/executor/nodeModifyTable.c         |  23 +-
src/include/executor/execPartition.h           |   8 +-
src/include/foreign/fdwapi.h                   |   8 +
src/include/nodes/execnodes.h                  |   6 +
16 files changed, 924 insertions(+), 91 deletions(-)

  2. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-20T11:53:26Z

    On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
> Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
> 
> Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
> 
> Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
> patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
> Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
> and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
> 
> Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp

This commit makes life hard for foreign data wrappers that support
data modifications.

If a FDW implements ExecForeignInsert, this commit automatically assumes
that it also supports COPY FROM.  It will call ExecForeignInsert without
calling PlanForeignModify and BeginForeignModify, and a FDW that does not
expect that will probably fail.

So this commit silently turns a functioning FDW into a broken FDW.
That is not nice.  Probably not every FDW is aware of this change, and
maybe there are FDWs that support INSERT but don't want to support COPY
for some reason.

I propose that PostgreSQL only allows COPY FROM on a foreign table if the FDW
implements BeginForeignInsert.  The attached patch implements that.

I think this should be backpatched to v11.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  3. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-22T05:50:20Z

    (2019/04/20 20:53), Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
>>
>> Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
>>
>> Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
>> patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
>> Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
>> and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
>>
>> Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp
>
> This commit makes life hard for foreign data wrappers that support
> data modifications.

Will look into this.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

  4. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-22T05:51:16Z

    Hi,

On 2019/04/20 20:53, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
>>
>> Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
>>
>> Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
>> patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
>> Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
>> and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
>>
>> Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp
> 
> This commit makes life hard for foreign data wrappers that support
> data modifications.
> 
> If a FDW implements ExecForeignInsert, this commit automatically assumes
> that it also supports COPY FROM.  It will call ExecForeignInsert without
> calling PlanForeignModify and BeginForeignModify, and a FDW that does not
> expect that will probably fail.
> 
> So this commit silently turns a functioning FDW into a broken FDW.
> That is not nice.  Probably not every FDW is aware of this change, and
> maybe there are FDWs that support INSERT but don't want to support COPY
> for some reason.

That seems like an oversight to me.  I agree that we had better checked
that a table's FDW provides BeginForeignInsert() before proceeding with
copying into the table, as your patch teaches CopyFrom() to do.

> I propose that PostgreSQL only allows COPY FROM on a foreign table if the FDW
> implements BeginForeignInsert.  The attached patch implements that.

Looks good to me, including the documentation change.

> I think this should be backpatched to v11.

Agreed.

Thanks,
Amit

  5. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-22T12:45:36Z

    (2019/04/20 20:53), Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
>>
>> Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
>>
>> Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
>> patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
>> Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
>> and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
>>
>> Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp
>
> This commit makes life hard for foreign data wrappers that support
> data modifications.
>
> If a FDW implements ExecForeignInsert, this commit automatically assumes
> that it also supports COPY FROM.  It will call ExecForeignInsert without
> calling PlanForeignModify and BeginForeignModify, and a FDW that does not
> expect that will probably fail.

This is not 100% correct; the FDW documentation says:

     <para>
      Tuples inserted into a partitioned table by 
<command>INSERT</command> or
      <command>COPY FROM</command> are routed to partitions.  If an FDW
      supports routable foreign-table partitions, it should also provide the
      following callback functions.  These functions are also called when
      <command>COPY FROM</command> is executed on a foreign table.
     </para>

> maybe there are FDWs that support INSERT but don't want to support COPY
> for some reason.

I agree on that point.

> I propose that PostgreSQL only allows COPY FROM on a foreign table if the FDW
> implements BeginForeignInsert.  The attached patch implements that.

I don't think that is a good idea, because there might be some FDWs that 
want to support COPY FROM on foreign tables without providing 
BeginForeignInsert.  (As for INSERT into foreign tables, we actually 
allow FDWs to support it without providing PlanForeignModify, 
BeginForeignModify, or EndForeignModify.)

It's permissible to throw an error in BeginForeignInsert, so what I was 
thinking for FDWs that don't want to support COPY FROM and 
INSERT/UPDATE/COPY FROM tuple routing was to provide BeginForeignInsert 
implementing something like this:

static void
fooBeginForeignInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
                       ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo)
{
     Relation    rel = resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc;

     if (mtstate->ps.plan == NULL)
         ereport(ERROR,
                 (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
                  errmsg("cannot copy to foreign table \"%s\"",
                         RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
     else
         ereport(ERROR,
                 (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
                  errmsg("cannot route tuples into foreign table \"%s\"",
                         RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
}

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

  6. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-22T19:37:25Z

    On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 21:45 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:

Thanks for looking into this!

> (2019/04/20 20:53), Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
> > > 
> > > Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
> > > 
> > > Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
> > > patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
> > > Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
> > > and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
> > > 
> > > Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp
> > 
> > This commit makes life hard for foreign data wrappers that support
> > data modifications.
> > 
> > If a FDW implements ExecForeignInsert, this commit automatically assumes
> > that it also supports COPY FROM.  It will call ExecForeignInsert without
> > calling PlanForeignModify and BeginForeignModify, and a FDW that does not
> > expect that will probably fail.
> 
> This is not 100% correct; the FDW documentation says:
> 
>      <para>
>       Tuples inserted into a partitioned table by 
> <command>INSERT</command> or
>       <command>COPY FROM</command> are routed to partitions.  If an FDW
>       supports routable foreign-table partitions, it should also provide the
>       following callback functions.  These functions are also called when
>       <command>COPY FROM</command> is executed on a foreign table.
>      </para>

I don't see the difference between the documentation and what I wrote above.

Before v11, a FDW could expect that ExecForeignInsert is only called if
BeginForeignModify was called earlier.
That has silently changed with v11.

> > maybe there are FDWs that support INSERT but don't want to support COPY
> > for some reason.
> 
> I agree on that point.
> 
> > I propose that PostgreSQL only allows COPY FROM on a foreign table if the FDW
> > implements BeginForeignInsert.  The attached patch implements that.
> 
> I don't think that is a good idea, because there might be some FDWs that 
> want to support COPY FROM on foreign tables without providing 
> BeginForeignInsert.  (As for INSERT into foreign tables, we actually 
> allow FDWs to support it without providing PlanForeignModify, 
> BeginForeignModify, or EndForeignModify.)
> 
> It's permissible to throw an error in BeginForeignInsert, so what I was 
> thinking for FDWs that don't want to support COPY FROM and 
> INSERT/UPDATE/COPY FROM tuple routing was to provide BeginForeignInsert 
> implementing something like this:
> 
> static void
> fooBeginForeignInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
>                        ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo)
> {
>      Relation    rel = resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc;
> 
>      if (mtstate->ps.plan == NULL)
>          ereport(ERROR,
>                  (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>                   errmsg("cannot copy to foreign table \"%s\"",
>                          RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
>      else
>          ereport(ERROR,
>                  (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>                   errmsg("cannot route tuples into foreign table \"%s\"",
>                          RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
> }

Sure, it is not hard to modify a FDW to continue working with v11.

My point is that this should not be necessary.

If a FDW worked well with v10, it should continue to work with v11
unless there is a necessity for a compatibility-breaking change.

On the other hand, if a FDW wants to support COPY in v11 and has no
need for BeginForeignInsert to support that, it is a simple exercise
for it to provide an empty BeginForeignInsert just to signal that it
wants to support COPY.

I realized that my previous patch forgot to check for tuple routing,
updated patch attached.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  7. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> — 2019-04-22T20:24:15Z

    On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 3:37 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
> Sure, it is not hard to modify a FDW to continue working with v11.
>
> My point is that this should not be necessary.

I'm not sure whether this proposal is a good idea or a bad idea, but I
think that it's inevitable that FDWs are going to need some updating
for new releases as the API evolves.  That has happened before and
will continue to happen.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

  8. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2019-04-22T20:27:03Z

    Hi,

On 2019-04-22 21:37:25 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] Foreign table COPY FROM and tuple routing requires
>  BeginForeignInsert
> 
> Commit 3d956d956a introduced support for foreign tables as partitions
> and COPY FROM on foreign tables.
> 
> If a foreign data wrapper supports data modifications, but either has
> not adapted to this change yet or doesn't want to support it
> for other reasons, it probably got broken by the above commit,
> because COPY will just call ExecForeignInsert anyway, which might not
> work because neither PlanForeignModify nor BeginForeignModify have
> been called.
> 
> To avoid breaking third-party foreign data wrappers in that way, allow
> COPY FROM and tuple routing for foreign tables only if the foreign data
> wrapper implements BeginForeignInsert.

Isn't this worse though? Before this it's an API change between major
versions. With this it's an API change in a *minor* version. Sure, it's
one that doesn't crash, but it's still a pretty substantial function
regression, no?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

  9. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-22T20:46:00Z

    On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 16:24 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 3:37 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
> > Sure, it is not hard to modify a FDW to continue working with v11.
> > 
> > My point is that this should not be necessary.
> 
> I'm not sure whether this proposal is a good idea or a bad idea, but I
> think that it's inevitable that FDWs are going to need some updating
> for new releases as the API evolves.  That has happened before and
> will continue to happen.

Absolutely.
I am just unhappy that this change caused unnecessary breakage.

If you developed a read-only FDW for 9.2, it didn't break with the
write support introduced in 9.3, because that used different API
functions.  That's how it should be IMHO.

If you developed a FDW for 9.1, it got broken in 9.2, because the
API had to change to allow returning multiple paths.
That was unfortunate but necessary, so it is ok.

Nothing in this patch required an incompatible change.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  10. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-22T20:56:20Z

    On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 13:27 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-04-22 21:37:25 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > Commit 3d956d956a introduced support for foreign tables as partitions
> > and COPY FROM on foreign tables.
> > 
> > If a foreign data wrapper supports data modifications, but either has
> > not adapted to this change yet or doesn't want to support it
> > for other reasons, it probably got broken by the above commit,
> > because COPY will just call ExecForeignInsert anyway, which might not
> > work because neither PlanForeignModify nor BeginForeignModify have
> > been called.
> > 
> > To avoid breaking third-party foreign data wrappers in that way, allow
> > COPY FROM and tuple routing for foreign tables only if the foreign data
> > wrapper implements BeginForeignInsert.
> 
> Isn't this worse though? Before this it's an API change between major
> versions. With this it's an API change in a *minor* version. Sure, it's
> one that doesn't crash, but it's still a pretty substantial function
> regression, no?

Hm, that's a good point.
You could say that this patch is too late, because a FDW might already be
relying on COPY FROM to work without BeginForeignInsert in v11.

How about just applying the patch from v12 on?
Then it is a behavior change in a major release, which is acceptable.
It requires the imaginary FDW above to add an empty BeginForeignInsert
callback function, but will unbreak FDW that slept through the change
that added COPY support.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  11. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2019-04-22T21:07:51Z

    Hi,

On 2019-04-22 22:56:20 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 13:27 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2019-04-22 21:37:25 +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > Commit 3d956d956a introduced support for foreign tables as partitions
> > > and COPY FROM on foreign tables.
> > > 
> > > If a foreign data wrapper supports data modifications, but either has
> > > not adapted to this change yet or doesn't want to support it
> > > for other reasons, it probably got broken by the above commit,
> > > because COPY will just call ExecForeignInsert anyway, which might not
> > > work because neither PlanForeignModify nor BeginForeignModify have
> > > been called.
> > > 
> > > To avoid breaking third-party foreign data wrappers in that way, allow
> > > COPY FROM and tuple routing for foreign tables only if the foreign data
> > > wrapper implements BeginForeignInsert.
> > 
> > Isn't this worse though? Before this it's an API change between major
> > versions. With this it's an API change in a *minor* version. Sure, it's
> > one that doesn't crash, but it's still a pretty substantial function
> > regression, no?
> 
> Hm, that's a good point.
> You could say that this patch is too late, because a FDW might already be
> relying on COPY FROM to work without BeginForeignInsert in v11.

I think that's the case.


> How about just applying the patch from v12 on?
> Then it is a behavior change in a major release, which is acceptable.
> It requires the imaginary FDW above to add an empty BeginForeignInsert
> callback function, but will unbreak FDW that slept through the change
> that added COPY support.

I fail to see the advantage. It'll still require FDWs to be fixed to
work correctly for v11, but additionally adds another set of API
differences that needs to be fixed by another set of FDWs.  I think this
ship simply has sailed.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

  12. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-23T06:59:14Z

    On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 14:07 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> How about just applying the patch from v12 on?
> > Then it is a behavior change in a major release, which is acceptable.
> > It requires the imaginary FDW above to add an empty BeginForeignInsert
> > callback function, but will unbreak FDW that slept through the change
> > that added COPY support.
> 
> I fail to see the advantage. It'll still require FDWs to be fixed to
> work correctly for v11, but additionally adds another set of API
> differences that needs to be fixed by another set of FDWs.  I think this
> ship simply has sailed.

I can accept that (having fixed my own FDW), but I am worried that it will
cause problems for FDW users.  Well, I guess they can always avoid COPY if
they don't want FDWs to crash.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  13. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-23T07:44:50Z

    On 2019/04/22 21:45, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2019/04/20 20:53), Laurenz Albe wrote:
>> I propose that PostgreSQL only allows COPY FROM on a foreign table if
>> the FDW
>> implements BeginForeignInsert.  The attached patch implements that.
> 
> I don't think that is a good idea, because there might be some FDWs that
> want to support COPY FROM on foreign tables without providing
> BeginForeignInsert.  (As for INSERT into foreign tables, we actually allow
> FDWs to support it without providing PlanForeignModify,
> BeginForeignModify, or EndForeignModify.)

I now understand why Laurenz's patch would in fact be a regression for
FDWs that do support COPY FROM and partition tuple routing without
providing BeginForeignInsert, although my first reaction was the opposite,
which was based on thinking (without confirming) that it's the core that
would crash due to initialization step being absent, but that's not the case.

The documentation [1] also says:

  If the BeginForeignInsert pointer is set to NULL, no action is taken for
  the initialization.

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/fdw-callbacks.html#FDW-CALLBACKS-UPDATE

> It's permissible to throw an error in BeginForeignInsert, so what I was
> thinking for FDWs that don't want to support COPY FROM and
> INSERT/UPDATE/COPY FROM tuple routing was to provide BeginForeignInsert
> implementing something like this:
> 
> static void
> fooBeginForeignInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
>                       ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo)
> {
>     Relation    rel = resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc;
> 
>     if (mtstate->ps.plan == NULL)
>         ereport(ERROR,
>                 (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>                  errmsg("cannot copy to foreign table \"%s\"",
>                         RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
>     else
>         ereport(ERROR,
>                 (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>                  errmsg("cannot route tuples into foreign table \"%s\"",
>                         RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
> }

+1

Thanks,
Amit

  14. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-24T11:54:26Z

    (2019/04/23 4:37), Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 21:45 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> (2019/04/20 20:53), Laurenz Albe wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2018-04-06 at 23:24 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>> Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign tables.
>>>>
>>>> Also enable this for postgres_fdw.
>>>>
>>>> Etsuro Fujita, based on an earlier patch by Amit Langote. The larger
>>>> patch series of which this is a part has been reviewed by Amit
>>>> Langote, David Fetter, Maksim Milyutin, Álvaro Herrera, Stephen Frost,
>>>> and me.  Minor documentation changes to the final version by me.
>>>>
>>>> Discussion: http://postgr.es/m/29906a26-da12-8c86-4fb9-d8f88442f2b9@lab.ntt.co.jp

>>> If a FDW implements ExecForeignInsert, this commit automatically assumes
>>> that it also supports COPY FROM.  It will call ExecForeignInsert without
>>> calling PlanForeignModify and BeginForeignModify, and a FDW that does not
>>> expect that will probably fail.
>>
>> This is not 100% correct; the FDW documentation says:
>>
>>       <para>
>>        Tuples inserted into a partitioned table by
>> <command>INSERT</command>  or
>>        <command>COPY FROM</command>  are routed to partitions.  If an FDW
>>        supports routable foreign-table partitions, it should also provide the
>>        following callback functions.  These functions are also called when
>>        <command>COPY FROM</command>  is executed on a foreign table.
>>       </para>
>
> I don't see the difference between the documentation and what I wrote above.
>
> Before v11, a FDW could expect that ExecForeignInsert is only called if
> BeginForeignModify was called earlier.
> That has silently changed with v11.

I have to admit that the documentation is not sufficient.

>> It's permissible to throw an error in BeginForeignInsert, so what I was
>> thinking for FDWs that don't want to support COPY FROM and
>> INSERT/UPDATE/COPY FROM tuple routing was to provide BeginForeignInsert
>> implementing something like this:
>>
>> static void
>> fooBeginForeignInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
>>                         ResultRelInfo *resultRelInfo)
>> {
>>       Relation    rel = resultRelInfo->ri_RelationDesc;
>>
>>       if (mtstate->ps.plan == NULL)
>>           ereport(ERROR,
>>                   (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>>                    errmsg("cannot copy to foreign table \"%s\"",
>>                           RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
>>       else
>>           ereport(ERROR,
>>                   (errcode(ERRCODE_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED),
>>                    errmsg("cannot route tuples into foreign table \"%s\"",
>>                           RelationGetRelationName(rel))));
>> }
>
> Sure, it is not hard to modify a FDW to continue working with v11.

How about adding to the documentation for BeginForeignInsert a mention 
that if an FDW doesn't support COPY FROM and/or routable foreign tables, 
it must throw an error in BeginForeignInsert accordingly.

> My point is that this should not be necessary.

In my opinion, I think this is necessary...

> On the other hand, if a FDW wants to support COPY in v11 and has no
> need for BeginForeignInsert to support that, it is a simple exercise
> for it to provide an empty BeginForeignInsert just to signal that it
> wants to support COPY.

That seems to me inconsistent with the concept of the existing APIs for 
updating foreign tables, because for an FDW that wants to support 
INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE and has no need for 
PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify, those APIs don't require the FDW 
to provide empty PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify to tell the core 
that it wants to support INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

  15. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-24T13:04:47Z

    On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 20:54 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> How about adding to the documentation for BeginForeignInsert a mention 
> that if an FDW doesn't support COPY FROM and/or routable foreign tables, 
> it must throw an error in BeginForeignInsert accordingly.

Sure, some more documentation would be good.

The documentation of ExecForeignInsert should mention something like:

  ExecForeignInsert is called for INSERT statements as well
  as for COPY FROM and tuples that are inserted into a foreign table
  because it is a partition of a partitioned table.

  In the case of a normal INSERT, BeginForeignModify will be called
  before ExecForeignInsert to perform any necessary setup.
  In the other cases, this setup has to happen in BeginForeignInsert.

  Before PostgreSQL v11, a foreign data wrapper could be certain that
  BeginForeignModify is always called before ExecForeignInsert.
  This is no longer true.

> > On the other hand, if a FDW wants to support COPY in v11 and has no
> > need for BeginForeignInsert to support that, it is a simple exercise
> > for it to provide an empty BeginForeignInsert just to signal that it
> > wants to support COPY.
> 
> That seems to me inconsistent with the concept of the existing APIs for 
> updating foreign tables, because for an FDW that wants to support 
> INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE and has no need for 
> PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify, those APIs don't require the FDW 
> to provide empty PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify to tell the core 
> that it wants to support INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE.

That is true, but so far there hasn't been a change to the FDW API that
caused a callback to be invoked in a different fashion than it used to be.

Perhaps it would have been better to create a new callback like
ExecForeignCopy with the same signature as ExecForeignInsert so that
you can use the same callback function for both if you want.
That would also have avoided the breakage.
But, of course it is too late for that now.

Note that postgres_fdw would have been broken by that API change as well
if it hasn't been patched.

At the very least, this should have been mentioned in the list of
incompatible changes for v11.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  16. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> — 2019-04-24T13:25:04Z

    On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 12:55, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
wrote:


> > My point is that this should not be necessary.
>
> In my opinion, I think this is necessary...
>

Could we decide by looking at what FDWs are known to exist?  I hope we are
trying to avoid breakage in the smallest number of FDWs.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
<http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

  17. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-24T14:03:12Z

    On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 14:25 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 at 12:55, Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>  
> > > My point is that this should not be necessary.
> > 
> > In my opinion, I think this is necessary...
> 
> Could we decide by looking at what FDWs are known to exist?
> I hope we are trying to avoid breakage in the smallest number of FDWs.

A good idea.  I don't volunteer to go through the list, but I had a look
at Multicorn, which is a FDW framework used by many FDWs, and it seems
to rely on multicornBeginForeignModify being called before
multicornExecForeignInsert (the former sets up a MulticornModifyState
used by the latter).

https://github.com/Kozea/Multicorn/blob/master/src/multicorn.c

Multicorn obviously hasn't got the message yet that the API has
changed in an incompatible fashion, so I'd argue that every
Multicorn FDW with write support is currently broken.


As Andres has argued above, it is too late to do anything more about
it than to document this and warn FDW authors as good as we can.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  18. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-25T13:17:12Z

    (2019/04/24 22:04), Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 20:54 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> How about adding to the documentation for BeginForeignInsert a mention
>> that if an FDW doesn't support COPY FROM and/or routable foreign tables,
>> it must throw an error in BeginForeignInsert accordingly.
>
> Sure, some more documentation would be good.
>
> The documentation of ExecForeignInsert should mention something like:
>
>    ExecForeignInsert is called for INSERT statements as well
>    as for COPY FROM and tuples that are inserted into a foreign table
>    because it is a partition of a partitioned table.
>
>    In the case of a normal INSERT, BeginForeignModify will be called
>    before ExecForeignInsert to perform any necessary setup.
>    In the other cases, this setup has to happen in BeginForeignInsert.

These seem a bit redundant to me because the documentation already says:

<programlisting>
void
BeginForeignModify(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
                    ResultRelInfo *rinfo,
                    List *fdw_private,
                    int subplan_index,
                    int eflags);
</programlisting>

      Begin executing a foreign table modification operation.  This 
routine is
      called during executor startup.  It should perform any initialization
      needed prior to the actual table modifications.  Subsequently,
      <function>*ExecForeignInsert*</function>, 
<function>ExecForeignUpdate</funct\
ion> or
      <function>ExecForeignDelete</function> will be called for each 
tuple to be
      inserted, updated, or deleted.

And

<programlisting>
void
BeginForeignInsert(ModifyTableState *mtstate,
                    ResultRelInfo *rinfo);
</programlisting>

      Begin executing an insert operation on a foreign table.  This 
routine is
      called right before the first tuple is inserted into the foreign table
      in both cases when it is the partition chosen for tuple routing 
and the
      target specified in a <command>COPY FROM</command> command.  It should
      perform any initialization needed prior to the actual insertion.
      Subsequently, <function>*ExecForeignInsert*</function> will be 
called for
      each tuple to be inserted into the foreign table.

>    Before PostgreSQL v11, a foreign data wrapper could be certain that
>    BeginForeignModify is always called before ExecForeignInsert.
>    This is no longer true.

OK, how about something like the attached?  I reworded this a bit, though.

>>> On the other hand, if a FDW wants to support COPY in v11 and has no
>>> need for BeginForeignInsert to support that, it is a simple exercise
>>> for it to provide an empty BeginForeignInsert just to signal that it
>>> wants to support COPY.
>>
>> That seems to me inconsistent with the concept of the existing APIs for
>> updating foreign tables, because for an FDW that wants to support
>> INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE and has no need for
>> PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify, those APIs don't require the FDW
>> to provide empty PlanForeignModify/BeginForeignModify to tell the core
>> that it wants to support INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE.
>
> That is true, but so far there hasn't been a change to the FDW API that
> caused a callback to be invoked in a different fashion than it used to be.

I agree on that point.

> Perhaps it would have been better to create a new callback like
> ExecForeignCopy with the same signature as ExecForeignInsert so that
> you can use the same callback function for both if you want.
> That would also have avoided the breakage.

If so, we would actually need another new callback 
ExecForeignTupleRouting since ExecForeignInsert is also called for 
INSERT/UPDATE tuple routing (or another two new callbacks 
ExecForeignInsertTupleRouting and ExecForeignUpdateTupleRouting in case 
an FDW wants to support either of the tuple routing).  My concern about 
that is: introducing such a concept might lead to an increase in the 
number of callbacks as FDW evolves, increasing the maintenance cost of 
the core.  So I think it would be better to just have ExecForeignInsert 
as a foreign-table alternative for heap_insert, as that would keep the 
core much simple.

> At the very least, this should have been mentioned in the list of
> incompatible changes for v11.

Agreed.  In the attached, I added a mention to the release notes for PG11.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

  19. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2019-04-25T14:29:08Z

    On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 22:17 +0900, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> > The documentation of ExecForeignInsert should mention something like:
> >
> >    ExecForeignInsert is called for INSERT statements as well
> >    as for COPY FROM and tuples that are inserted into a foreign table
> >    because it is a partition of a partitioned table.
> >
> >    In the case of a normal INSERT, BeginForeignModify will be called
> >    before ExecForeignInsert to perform any necessary setup.
> >    In the other cases, this setup has to happen in BeginForeignInsert.
> 
> These seem a bit redundant to me [...]
> 
> OK, how about something like the attached?  I reworded this a bit, though.

I like your patch better than my wording.

Thanks for the effort!

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

  20. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Amit Langote <langote_amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-26T04:20:31Z

    Fujita-san,

On 2019/04/25 22:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2019/04/24 22:04), Laurenz Albe wrote:
>>    Before PostgreSQL v11, a foreign data wrapper could be certain that
>>    BeginForeignModify is always called before ExecForeignInsert.
>>    This is no longer true.
> 
> OK, how about something like the attached?  I reworded this a bit, though.

Thanks for the patch.

+     Note that this function is also called when inserting routed tuples into
+     a foreign-table partition or executing <command>COPY FROM</command> on
+     a foreign table, in which case it is called in a different way than it
+     is in the <command>INSERT</command> case.

Maybe minor, but should the last part of this sentence read as:

...in which case it is called in a different way than it is in the case
<command>INSERT</command> is operating directly on the foreign table.

?

Thanks,
Amit

  21. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-26T04:58:15Z

    Amit-san,

(2019/04/26 13:20), Amit Langote wrote:
> On 2019/04/25 22:17, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
>> (2019/04/24 22:04), Laurenz Albe wrote:
>>>     Before PostgreSQL v11, a foreign data wrapper could be certain that
>>>     BeginForeignModify is always called before ExecForeignInsert.
>>>     This is no longer true.
>>
>> OK, how about something like the attached?  I reworded this a bit, though.
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> +     Note that this function is also called when inserting routed tuples into
> +     a foreign-table partition or executing<command>COPY FROM</command>  on
> +     a foreign table, in which case it is called in a different way than it
> +     is in the<command>INSERT</command>  case.
>
> Maybe minor, but should the last part of this sentence read as:
>
> ...in which case it is called in a different way than it is in the case
> <command>INSERT</command>  is operating directly on the foreign table.
>
> ?

Yeah, but I think it would be OK to just say "the INSERT case" because 
this note is added to the docs for ExecForeignInsert(), which allows the 
FDW to directly insert into foreign tables as you know, so users will 
read "the INSERT case" as "the case <command>INSERT</command> is 
operating directly on the foreign table".

Thanks for the comment!

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

  22. Re: pgsql: Allow insert and update tuple routing and COPY for foreign table

    Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp> — 2019-04-26T09:25:38Z

    (2019/04/26 13:58), Etsuro Fujita wrote:
> (2019/04/26 13:20), Amit Langote wrote:
>> + Note that this function is also called when inserting routed tuples
>> into
>> + a foreign-table partition or executing<command>COPY FROM</command> on
>> + a foreign table, in which case it is called in a different way than it
>> + is in the<command>INSERT</command> case.
>>
>> Maybe minor, but should the last part of this sentence read as:
>>
>> ...in which case it is called in a different way than it is in the case
>> <command>INSERT</command> is operating directly on the foreign table.
>>
>> ?
>
> Yeah, but I think it would be OK to just say "the INSERT case" because
> this note is added to the docs for ExecForeignInsert(), which allows the
> FDW to directly insert into foreign tables as you know, so users will
> read "the INSERT case" as "the case <command>INSERT</command> is
> operating directly on the foreign table".

Pushed as-is.  I think we can change that later if necessary.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita