Re: disposition of remaining patches

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> FWIW, my thought is to try to get the API patch committed and then do
> the file_fdw patch.  Maybe I'm hopelessly ASCII-centric, but I do not
> see encoding considerations as a blocking factor for this.  If we define
> that files are read in the database encoding, it's still a pretty damn
> useful feature.  We can look at whether that can be improved after we
> have some kind of feature at all.

Sure. OTOH, Itagaki Takahiro's solution wasn't a lot of code, so if
he feels reasonably confident in it, I'd like to see it committed.

> postgresql_fdw may have to live as an external project for the 9.1
> cycle, unless it's in much better shape than you suggest above.
> I won't feel too bad about that as long as the core support exists.
> More than likely, people would want to improve it on a faster release
> cycle than the core anyway.

I think as long as we have one implementation in contrib, we're OK to release.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company