From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Martin Pihlak <martin(dot)pihlak(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SQL/MED compatible connection manager |
Date: | 2008-11-24 14:14:17 |
Message-ID: | 492AB6B9.1060601@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martin Pihlak wrote:
> Here's another revision of the connection manager. This adds:
> * reference documentation
> * psql, tab-completion, \dw, \dr, \dm commands.
> * pg_dump support
>
> Still todo:
> * more comprehensive regression tests
> * introductory documentation
> * dblink support
>
> I hope to finish these items during next week, and remove the WIP
> status then.
Looks very good, please continue.
Most of this is straight out of the standard, so there isn't much to
discuss on the interfaces. I have two small things to wonder about:
On your wiki page, you have this example:
CREATE SERVER userdb TYPE 'plproxy_cluster'
FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER plproxy
OPTIONS (
server='dbname=userdb_p0 host=127.0.0.1 port=6000',
server='dbname=userdb_p1 host=127.0.0.1 port=6000',
server='dbname=userdb_p2 host=127.0.0.1 port=6000',
server='dbname=userdb_p3 host=127.0.0.1 port=6000',
connection_lifetime=3600
);
If I read this right, SQL/MED requires option names to be unique for a
server. To this needs to be rethought.
Do we really need the function pg_get_remote_connection_info()? This
could be done directly with the information schema. E.g., your example
SELECT * FROM pg_get_remote_connection_info('userdb');
appears to be the same as
SELECT option_name, option_value
FROM information_schema.foreign_server_options
WHERE foreign_server_name = 'userdb';
This view also appears to have the necessary access control provisions.
And similarly, pg_get_user_mapping_options() is equivalent to
information_schema.user_mapping_options.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-24 14:14:43 | Re: blatantly a bug in the documentation |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2008-11-24 14:10:29 | Re: blatantly a bug in the documentation |