Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

On 7/28/08, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Would capability to do remote procedure calls useful addition to PostgreSQL
> feature set?

I agree with Tom/Simon on the topic of builtin remote calls - if there
is a plan to implement CREATE REMOTE TABLE/VIEW (builtin remote views)
then it should be quite easy to extend the implementation to functions:
CREATE REMOTE FUNCTION. Thus making the PL version of remote calls
redundant.

Although that seems a far way off.

Btw, one thing that could be immediately useful would be to extract the
connection defining part from SQL-MED and add that to core, so that dblink,
plproxy and dbi-link could share that. But that needs someone who has
ability to process a 500+ page standard.

--
marko