Re: validating foreign tables

2011/2/22 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 02/21/2011 08:59 PM, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
>>> I think we need to overhaul validators in 9.2 listening to FDW developers'
>>> opinions anyway.
>
>> Ok, I guess. It just seems to me like it will be harder to extend the
>> API later than now, so if we can reasonably foresee a likely need we
>> should try to provide for it.
>
> Perhaps we should put a large friendly "EXPERIMENTAL, SUBJECT TO CHANGE"
> notice on all the FDW API stuff?  Just tell people up front that we're
> not prepared to promise any API stability yet.  There's stuff we *know*
> is lacking (it's read-only, the optimization support sucks) in addition
> to whatever we may later realize is misdesigned.
>
>                        regards, tom lane

+1

regards

Pavel Stehule
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>