Re: pgsql_fdw in contrib

2012/6/18 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> I can't help but wonder (having been down the contrib/core/extension
> road myself) if it isn't better to improve the facilities to register
> and search for qualified extensions (like Perl CPAN) so that people
> looking for code to improve their backends can find it.  That way,
> you're free to release/do xyz/abandon your project as you see fit
> without having to go through -hackers.  This should also remove a lot
> of the stigma with not being in core since if stock postgres
> installations can access the necessary modules via CREATE EXTENSION, I
> think it will make it easier for projects like this to get used with
> the additional benefit of decentralizing project management.

What about PGXN?

BTW, I'm with Robert about "we want to have at least one FDW in
core that actually talks to some other database server, rather than
just to a file, and it seems like pgsql_fdw is the obvious choice".

We have dblink as contrib, why not pgsql_fdw too?

Other FDWs could be available at PGXN, pgFoundry, Github, etc.

[]s
--
Dickson S. Guedes
mail/xmpp: guedes(at)guedesoft(dot)net - skype: guediz
http://guedesoft.net - http://www.postgresql.org.br