Re: Bypassing cursors in postgres_fdw to enable parallel plans

On Thu, 2 Jul 2026 at 19:57, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 5:27 AM Rafia Sabih <rafia.pghackers@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > So, do you suggest we can have a backpointer of conn also in
> active_fsstate...?
>
> I think that fsstate and active_fsstate have to be pointing to the
> same conn_state object. Do you think otherwise?
>
> No, but I don't understand why you think they can be different in the
current implementation.
Currently, as per init_scan fsstate->conn_state->active_scan = fsstate, and
it is never reassigned or anything.
So they cannot have different conn_state.
Am I missing something?

-- 
> Robert Haas
> EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>


-- 
Regards,
Rafia Sabih
CYBERTEC PostgreSQL International GmbH