Re: FOREIGN TABLE doc fix
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>, Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.hanada@gmail.com>, Shigeru Hanada <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-06-13T14:36:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Don't hold your breath. We'll probably be making enough changes in the >> FDW infrastructure (particularly planner support) that making an FDW >> work on both 9.1 and 9.2 would be an exercise in frustration, if it's >> even possible. > Oh joy. There's a GSoC student working on 2 non-trivial FDW's right > now, and I have a couple I've been working on. If we're going to make > the API incompatible to that extent, we might as well not bother :-( Oh, that's by no means a waste of time --- we need some examples to help us figure out where the pain points are. I'm just saying that the best ways to do things will probably change quite a bit as we introduce solutions for the pain points. And I don't intend to be too concerned about preserving backwards compatibility at this stage. regards, tom lane