Re: BUG #18467: postgres_fdw (deparser) ignores LimitOption
Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
To: Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>
Cc: Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2024-05-24T08:32:55Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Hi, On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 11:30 PM Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 23 May 2024 at 14:54, Önder Kalacı <onderkalaci@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm also not good at wording, but I have a minor suggestions like the > > following : > > > > /* > > * Also, the FETCH FIRST/NEXT ... ROW/ROWS WITH TIES clause cannot be > > pushed down > > * because: > > * a) The remote system may have a different understanding of equality, > > which can > > * result in varying results, such as non-deterministic collations. > > * b) We do not have knowledge of the remote server's version > > * as this clause is only supported for PG13 and above. > > */ > Thanks for your review! Fixed in v5 patch. I think it is reasonable to refuse to send WITH TIES, but I am confused about the comments above. Do we really need to care about a) here in add_foreign_final_paths()? If the query has WITH TIES, 1) it must have ORDER BY as well, which determines what additional rows tie for the last place in the result set, and 2) ORDER BY must already have been determined to be safe to push down before we get here. So in that case, if getting here, we can consider that WITH TIES is also safe to push down (if the remote is v13 or later). No? Anyway, thank you for working on this issue! Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
Commits
-
postgres_fdw: Refuse to send FETCH FIRST WITH TIES to remote servers.
- 2b461efc5195 13.16 landed
- 269e2c391628 14.13 landed
- b33c141cc52b 15.8 landed
- 8405d5a37a25 16.4 landed
- 8cfbac1492bd 17.0 landed
-
Revert temporal primary keys and foreign keys
- 8aee330af55d 17.0 cited