On 2015/03/13 0:50, Tom Lane wrote:
The tableoid problem can be fixed much less invasively as per the attached
patch.  I think that we should continue to assume that ctid is not
meaningful (and hence should read as (4294967295,0)) in FDWs that use
ROW_MARK_COPY, and press forward on fixing the locking issues for
postgres_fdw by letting it use ROW_MARK_REFERENCE or something close to
that.  That would also cause ctid to read properly for rows from
postgres_fdw.

OK, thanks!

BTW, what do you think about opening/locking foreign tables selected for update at InitPlan, which the original patch does? As I mentioned in [1], ISTM that ExecOpenScanRelation called from ExecInitForeignScan is assuming that.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/54bcbbf8.3020...@lab.ntt.co.jp


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to