Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Yeah. An alternative definition that would support that would be to
>> call the upper-path-providing callback for each FDW that's responsible
>> for any base relation of the query. But I think that that would often
>> lead to a lot of redundant/wasted computation, and it's not clear to
>> me that we can support such cases without other changes as well.
> Sure, that's fine with me. Are you going to go make these changes now?
Yeah, in a bit.
> Eventually, we might just support a configurable flag on FDWs where
> FDWs that want to do this sort of thing can request callbacks on every
> join and every upper rel in the query. But that can wait.
That'd be a possibility, too.
regards, tom lane