Re: review: FDW API - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: review: FDW API
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinwTnxh5JHd69=tD3u7gLzy_C12P00BCg58PDTq@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: review: FDW API  (Shigeru HANADA <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Shigeru HANADA
<hanada@metrosystems.co.jp> wrote:
>> * Is there any use case for changing the handler or validator function
>> of an existign FDW with ALTER? To me it just seems like an unnecessary
>> complication.
>
> AFAICS, the only case for that is upgrading FDW to new one without
> re-creating foreign tables.  I don't have strong opinion for this
> issue, and it seems reasonable to remove ALTER feature in first
> version.

-1.  I don't think that removing the ability to change this is going
to save a measurable amount of complexity, and it certainly will suck
if you need it and don't have it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Shigeru HANADA
Date:
Subject: Re: review: FDW API
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: SSI patch version 14