Re: FOREIGN TABLE doc fix

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> Incidentally, are you planning to revive the PostgreSQL FDW for 9.2?
>>>> That would be a killer feature.
>
>>> Even more killer would be that it could be built/packaged as an
>>> extension, and use for 9.1 too ;-)
>
>> +1!
>
> 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 :-(

--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company