On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:29 AM Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
On 2/11/21 10:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 9:42 AM Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com> wrote: >>> As Jan said in his last email, they're not proposing all the different >>> aspects needed. In fact, nothing has actually been proposed yet. This >>> is an entirely philosophical debate. I don't even know what's being >>> proposed at this point - I just know it *could* be useful. Let's just >>> wait and see what is actually proposed before shooting it down, yes? >> I don't think I'm trying to shoot anything down, because as I said, I >> like extensibility and am generally in favor of it. Rather, I'm >> expressing a concern which seems to me to be justified, based on what >> was posted. I'm sorry that my tone seems to have aggravated you, but >> it wasn't intended to do so. > Likewise, the point I was trying to make is that a "pluggable wire > protocol" is only a tiny part of what would be needed to have a credible > MySQL, Oracle, or whatever clone. There are large semantic differences > from those products; there are maintenance issues arising from the fact > that we whack structures like parse trees around all the time; and so on. > Maybe there is some useful thing that can be accomplished here, but we > need to consider the bigger picture rather than believing (without proof) > that a few hook variables will be enough to do anything.
Yeah. I think we'd need a fairly fully worked implementation to see where it goes. Is Amazon going to release (under TPL) its TDS implementation of this? That might go a long way to convincing me this is worth considering.
Everything is planned to be released under the Apache 2.0 license so people are free to do with it as they choose.
