Push-down, write tables and PostgreSQL 9.3

[brunosimioni]

Atri,

PostgreSQL 9.3 FDW API provides great new features, like push-down matches, writeable table and performance issues (in an overall pov).

Is there any activity plan to migrate JDBC_FDW to PostgreSQL 9.3? Here we are facing some performance issues (1s+/query), besides all database resources lost, being stucked at 9.2 version.

Can we help you in some way?

Thanks!

[atris]

Hi,

Thanks for mentioning it.

We need to add to support for 9.3. However currently I am very busy in my job and hence would not be able to directly work on it.

It would great if somebody could work on it with me sp that my life becomes easier.

Thanks for offering your help.

Regards,

Atri

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 9:05 PM, brunosimioni [email protected]:

Atri,

PostgreSQL 9.3 FDW API provides great new features, like push-down matches, writeable table and performance issues (in an overall pov).

Is there any activity plan to migrate JDBC_FDW to PostgreSQL 9.3? Here we are facing some performance issues (1s+/query), besides all database resources lost, being stucked at 9.2 version.

Can we help you in some way?

Thanks!

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/atris/JDBC_FDW/issues/15 .

Regards,

Atri l'apprenant

[merlinm]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Atri Sharma [email protected]:

Hi,

Thanks for mentioning it.

We need to add to support for 9.3. However currently I am very busy in my job and hence would not be able to directly work on it.

It would great if somebody could work on it with me sp that my life becomes easier.

Thanks for offering your help.

Regards,

Quick note: You should continue to support this library. If you are going to abandon it, please inform people of that so that they can avoid using it...unsupported software generally should be avoided.

merlin

[atris]

I am not abandoning it. I will add those features but will need some time

On Monday, February 17, 2014, Merlin Moncure [email protected] wrote:

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:11 AM, Atri Sharma <[email protected]javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');

wrote:

Hi,

Thanks for mentioning it.

We need to add to support for 9.3. However currently I am very busy in my job and hence would not be able to directly work on it.

It would great if somebody could work on it with me sp that my life becomes easier.

Thanks for offering your help.

Regards,

Quick note: You should continue to support this library. If you are going to abandon it, please inform people of that so that they can avoid using it...unsupported software generally should be avoided.

merlin

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/atris/JDBC_FDW/issues/15#issuecomment-35285214 .

Regards,

Atri l'apprenant

[brunosimioni]

Would your draw/identify some points to change to get an updated release? Maybe we can help your if your guide us.

What do you think, @merlinm?

Best

[merlinm]

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 1:01 PM, brunosimioni [email protected]:

Would your draw/identify some points to change to get an updated release? Maybe we can help your if your guide us.

What do you think, @merlinm https://github.com/merlinm?

The way FDW API is structured unfortunately at present this work is a large copy/paste job from pgsql fdw. That being said it shouldn't be too difficult to do presuming the deparsing code is compatible with the server's SQL dialect (I'm thinking it mostly will be).

merlin

[brunosimioni]

merlin,

I ask for Atri's guidance, just because I guess he have some points about his own project and ideas. Something around trying to make jdbc_fdw better than a copy&paste job, or even, how we can improve it's perfomance. (since it's a copy & paste from a reference implementation, it should - theorically - perform good. it's actually not happening, and it should be repaired).

Would you clarify how you can help us in this process, please? Are you directly involved in this project or even knows how it could works with PostgreSQL 9.3?

I'm a current user of jdbc_fdw project and, unfortunatelly I had to implement a sync method (turning a foreing table in a local table via insert/update, to get rid of performance issues. That's not a good solution, but, since jdbc_fdw gives me 1, 2 seconds delay, I have no other option.

Best, Bruno.

[atris]

I can spend some time next week to think what we can do. Let's sit down and plan then if it's fine with you H Sent from my iPad

On 20-Feb-2014, at 6:31, brunosimioni [email protected] wrote:

merlin,

I ask for Atri's guidance, just because I guess he have some points about his own project and ideas. Something around trying to make jdbc_fdw better than a copy&paste job, or even, how we can improve it's perfomance. (since it's a copy & paste from a reference implementation, it should - theorically - perform good. it's actually not happening, and it should be repaired).

Would you clarify how you can help us in this process, please? Are you directly involved in this project or even knows how it could works with PostgreSQL 9.3?

I'm a current user of jdbc_fdw project and, unfortunatelly I had to implement a sync method (turning a foreing table in a local table via insert/update, to get rid of performance issues. That's not a good solution, but, since jdbc_fdw gives me 1, 2 seconds delay, I have no other option.

Best, Bruno.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[hubrix]

It's been about a year, is this issue dead and is the project unmaintained or will this happen at some point?