Re: [patch] plproxy v2

On 7/8/08, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>  On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 10:21 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>  > On Sat, 2008-06-28 at 16:36 +0300, Marko Kreen wrote:
>
> > I very much like PL/Proxy and support your vision. Including the
>  > features of PL/Proxy in core seems like a great idea to me.
>
>
> > Adding this feature for tables would be interesting with Hot Standby,
>  > since it would allow you to offload SELECT statements onto the standby
>  > automatically.
>  >
>  > This would be considerably easier to integrate than text search was.
>
>
> First let me say that I too enjoy PL/Proxy quite a bit. However, I don't
>  think it needs to be in core. I wouldn't mind seeing it in contrib (or
>  better yet modules/ should we ever get around to that).

I'm not against contrib/ considering that the docs are now nicely
integrated, but then, whats the difference between src/pl/ and contrib/?

OTOH, if you argue LANGUAGE plproxy vs. CREATE REMOTE FUNCTION,
then thats different matter.  It seems to be we should do REMOTE FUNCTION
after, not before REMOTE TABLE as the table/view implementation
needs to dictate the actual details.

-- 
marko