On tis, 2012-02-28 at 11:20 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > [ snicker ] But still, Peter has a point: pgsql is not a name for > the > > product, it's at best an abbreviation. We aren't calling the other > > thing orcl_fdw or ora_fdw. > > > > I think either postgres_fdw or postgresql_fdw would be fine. > > I liked the shorter name, myself, but I'm not going to make a big deal > about it.
Let's at least be clear about the reasons here. The fact that postgresql_fdw_validator exists means (a) there is a possible naming conflict that has not been discussed yet, and/or (b) the name is already settled and we need to think of a way to make postgresql_fdw_validator work with the new actual FDW. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers