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

From Marko Kreen
Subject Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Date
Msg-id CACMqXCLA4WYTRuRHV2UA02kAzoXubtCZkmjOijMM5xKQpmN+Lw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> 2011/10/25 Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.hanada@gmail.com>:
>>> I'd like to propose pgsql_fdw, FDW for external PostgreSQL server, as a
>>> contrib module.  I think that this module would be the basis of further
>>> SQL/MED development for core, e.g. join-push-down and ANALYZE support.
>
>> I have not looked at the code itself, but I wonder if we shouldn't
>> consider making this a part of core-proper, not just a contrib module.
>> The fact that it isn't *already* available in core surprises a lot of
>> people...
>
> We've just spent a whole lot of blood and sweat on making the extension
> mechanism work nicely.  I don't understand this urge to not use it.
>
> ATM I'm not sure it's even a good idea to push pgsql_fdw into contrib.
> Once we do that its release schedule will get locked to core's ---
> wouldn't it be better to keep flexibility for now, while it's in such
> active development?

Simple question - do FDW internals need work?

--
marko


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby
Next
From: Gurjeet Singh
Date:
Subject: Re: Unreproducible bug in snapshot import code