Horton

Re: postgres_fdw: perform UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING on a join directly

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Etsuro Fujita <fujita.etsuro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh.lathia@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2018-02-08T01:40:41Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> I spent a while reading through this today.  I see a few decisions
>> here or there that are debatable, in the sense that somebody else
>> might have chosen to do it differently, but I don't see anything that
>> actually looks wrong.  So, committed.
>
> The buildfarm's opinion of it is lower than yours.  Just eyeballing
> the failures, I'd say there was some naivete about the reproducibility
> of tuple CTIDs across different platforms.  Is there a good reason
> these test cases need to print CTID?

Uggh, I missed the fact that they were doing that.  It's probably
actually useful test coverage, but it's not surprising that it isn't
stable.

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

Commits

  1. Temporarily instrument postgres_fdw test to look for statistics changes.

  2. postgres_fdw: Fourth attempt to stabilize regression tests.

  3. postgres_fdw: Third attempt to stabilize regression tests.

  4. postgres_fdw: Attmempt to stabilize regression tests.

  5. postgres_fdw: Push down UPDATE/DELETE joins to remote servers.