Re: Feature proposal: www_fdw

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Alexander Soudakov <cygakob(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feature proposal: www_fdw
Date: 2011-09-28 16:40:10
Message-ID: 4575.1317228010@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Why should this be a core feature, as the subject suggests? It could
> just be an extension, like other FDWs, no?

In fact it had *better* be an extension, not core, because anything that
allows the server to go out and touch the web is going to be a security
hazard in some people's usages. I can see that some people will want
this type of functionality, but others definitely won't.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-09-28 16:48:28 Re: fix for pg_upgrade
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-09-28 15:57:21 Re: Extension proposal: www_fdw