Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Date
Msg-id CABUevEwn--mP54RtEayqzWmsh4HPAE1ZrSwiQ2o0toK5+1yqbA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 19:25, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> On 10/26/2011 12:47 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>
>>> If that was what he meant, I'd vote against it.  There are way too many
>>> people who will *not* want their databases configured to be able to
>>> reach out onto the net.  This feature should be something that has to be
>>> installed by explicit user action.
>>
>> That is not what I meant.
>>
>> I meant installed the shared library by defualt, but still require
>> CREATE EXTENSION.
>>
>
> I don't see why it should be different from other standard modules, such as
> citext or hstore, both of which have pretty wide use, and less possible
> security implications than this.

As I stated earlier, it's really back to the old discussion of
splitting up contrib. This would be the "additional module" part, but
not the "example of how to do things" part of that...

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server