Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server

From: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Date: 2011-10-25 12:39:37
Message-ID: CADyhKSXO_dKPNqEEaKzWgrfm2SGP5NUq3Moq4fVSspMOdE303A@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>> 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?
>
> I would be happy to keep it outside, and integrate it in the final CF
> for example :)
>
Right now, file_fdw is the only FDW module that we have in the core,
however, it is inadequacy to proof the new concept of FDW feature
to utilize external RDBMS, such as join push-down of foreign tables.

I think the pgsql-fdw module also should be included in the core
distribution as a basis of future enhancement, unless we don't
need any working modules when an enhancement of FDW is
proposed.

Thanks,
-- 
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2011-10-25 12:51:51
Subject: Re: Hot Backup with rsync fails at pg_clog if under load
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2011-10-25 12:24:39
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group