Re: [HACKERS] pg_background contrib module proposal

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 1/19/17 12:47 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> 4. There is some controversy on where implemented feature shall be: in separate extension (as in this patch), in
db_link,in some PL API, in FDW or somewhere else. I think that new extension is an appropriate place for the feature.
ButI’m not certain. 
>>
>> I suppose we should decide first whether we want pg_background as a
>> separate extension or rather pursue extending dblink as proposed elsewhere.
>>
>> I don't know if pg_background allows any use case that dblink can't
>> handle (yet).
>
> For the record, I have no big problem with extending dblink to allow
> this instead of adding pg_background.  But I think we should try to
> get one or the other done in time for this release.

Moved to CF 2017-03 as the discussion is not over yet.
--
Michael