On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 09:15:37PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I think this could best live as an external project.
Likely so. Looking at the patch, everything written in it does not depend directly on something external, with all the function internals being written based on Postgres APIs. Now, including this compatibility layer even as a contrib module would have a cost: why would it be a good idea to bear the cost of such a module in core, where we would need to maintain compatibility depending on what mssql decides in its own product? Perhaps this is unlikely, but this possibility means an extra maintenance burden here. By the way, when proposing patches, I'd recommend to include some documentation in them. Proposals in work-in-progress form as OK as well, of course, if your goal is to take the temperature. I'm on the same side as Peter here: this proposal would have a better life if maintained externally. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
