Re: SQL/MED dummy vs postgresql wrapper

From: ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SQL/MED dummy vs postgresql wrapper
Date: 2009-01-07 02:08:27
Message-ID: 20090107103521.80FB.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

> We could just use the dummy wrapper and set an
> option for the foreign data wrapper that tells what options are valid. That
> is, you would say
>
> CREATE FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER postgresql_dummy LIBRARY 'dummy_fdw' LANGUAGE C
> OPTIONS (valid_options '{host,port,dbname,user,password...}');

Looks reasonable, but is 'dummy_fdw' a proper name for it?
I think 'template_fdw' or something might be better.

If we will complete 'postgres_fdw' as a replacement of dblink, the fdw
will not need the flexibility because it should accept only valid
parameters for PostgreSQL. Then, 'dummy_fdw' might be kept only for
user-defined FDWs. Since users see the library name, we'd better to
choose more suitable name for it.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-01-07 02:13:17 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: This makes all the \dX commands (most importantly to most: \df)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2009-01-07 01:51:05 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: This makes all the \dX commands (most importantly to most: \df)