From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Shigeru Hanada <shigeru(dot)hanada(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API) |
Date: | 2015-02-13 09:16:50 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQXTA-B3Qzg8K2b7uLYTAkkBSO8=Uffx0T51xXmBa-bog@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> > Where are we on this? AFAIK, we have now a feature with no documentation
>> > and no example in-core to test those custom routine APIs, hence moved to
>> > next CF.
>> >
>> Now Hanada-san is working on the example module that use this new
>> infrastructure on top of postgres_fdw. Probably, he will submit the
>> patch within a couple of days, for the upcoming commit fest.
>>
>
> I am a bit surprised by that. Are you planning to give up on the ctidscan
> module module and
>
Sorry I typed the wrong key.
So... Are you planning to give up on the ctidscan module and submit only
the module written by Hanada-san on top of postgres_fdw? As I imagine that
the goal is just to have a test module to run the APIs why would the module
submitted by Hanada-san be that necessary?
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Geoff Winkless | 2015-02-13 10:16:03 | Re: gcc5: initdb produces gigabytes of _fsm files |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-02-13 09:12:23 | Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API) |