On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote: >> If somebody still needs it, I'll rebase and adjust the patch towards >> the latest custom-scan interface. However, I cannot be motivated for >> the feature nobody wants. > > Robert, can you weigh in on this? Do we currently have anything in the > tree that tests the Custom Scan interface? If not, would this be helpful > for that purpose?
We don't have anything that currently tests the Custom Scan interface in the tree. The question is how important that is, and whether it's worth having what's basically a toy implementation just to demonstrate that the feature can work. If so, I think ctidscan is as good a toy example as any; in the interest of full disclosure, I was the one who suggested it in the first place. But I am not entirely sure it's a good idea to saddle ourselves with that maintenance effort. It would be a lot more interesting if we had an example that figured to be generally useful. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers