On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 13:47 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
This patch is listed in the commitfest, but I think the consensus was
that it needed some rework.
No doubt, but SQL/MED will require a lot of works. Can we split the work
into small parts?
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 17:07 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
Here is a WIP patch for a foreign data wrapper based dblink.
It integrates dblink module into core and adds a new functionality,
automatic transaction management. The new interface of dblink is
exported by include/foreign/dblink.h.
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
This patch is listed in the commitfest, but I think the consensus was
that it needed some rework.
No doubt, but SQL/MED will require a lot of works. Can we split the work
into small parts? I intended FDW-based dblink to be one of the split jobs.
Here
Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
However, automatic transaction management needs help by core. Is it
acceptable to have two-phase callbacks?
Probably, but it's far too early to decide what the interface should
look like.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent
Itagaki Takahiro itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp writes:
Here is a WIP patch for a foreign data wrapper based dblink.
It integrates dblink module into core and adds a new functionality,
automatic transaction management.
I don't believe there is any consensus for integrating dblink into core,
2009/8/19 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Itagaki Takahiro itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp writes:
Here is a WIP patch for a foreign data wrapper based dblink.
It integrates dblink module into core and adds a new functionality,
automatic transaction management.
I don't believe there is any
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2009/8/19 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
I don't believe there is any consensus for integrating dblink into core,
and I for one will resist that strongly. Â Keep it in contrib.
if integration means, so I could to write query like
SELECT * FROM
Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
It integrates dblink module into core and adds a new functionality,
automatic transaction management.
Why does it need to be integrated to core? I'd prefer to keep dblink out
of core, unless there's a reason.
I want pretty much the automatic transaction management. It
2009/8/19 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2009/8/19 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
I don't believe there is any consensus for integrating dblink into core,
and I for one will resist that strongly. Keep it in contrib.
if integration means, so I could
Tom Lane wrote:
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes:
2009/8/19 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:
I don't believe there is any consensus for integrating dblink into core,
and I for one will resist that strongly. Â Keep it in contrib.
if integration means, so I could to write query like
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I don't believe there is any consensus for integrating dblink into core,
and I for one will resist that strongly. Keep it in contrib.
OK, our consensus is that dblink should be replaced with SQL/MED interface
and then we'll start to consider integrating
11 matches
Mail list logo
