Shigeru Hanada wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> It ought to be pulling the rows back a few at a time, and >> that's not going to work well if multiple scans are sharing the same >> connection. (We might be able to dodge that by declaring a cursor >> for each scan, but I'm not convinced that such a solution will scale up >> to writable foreign tables, nested queries, subtransactions, etc.) > > Indeed the FDW used CURSOR in older versions. Sorry for that I have > not looked writable foreign table patch closely yet, but it would > require (may be multiple) remote update query executions during > scanning?
It would for example call ExecForeignUpdate after each call to IterateForeignScan that produces a row that meets the UPDATE condition. Yours, Laurenz Albe -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
