On 04/14/2016 08:26 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 13 April 2016 at 17:48, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com <mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com <mailto:si...@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote: > Anyway, who agrees with the overall design of pglogical and who does not? I haven't spent very much time on it yet. I tend to prefer the idea of integrating it more deeply into core and adding SQL syntax around it, but I'm not going to fight tooth and nail for that if a contrary consensus emerges. 1) "more deeply into core" I'm open to doing that for some parts of the code, if there is benefit. At present, an extension has exactly the same attributes as an in-core solution, so I don't currently see any benefit in doing so. Could you explain what you see?
From my perspective, grammar.
2) "SQL syntax" I'm not sure what SQL syntax would give us. I know what we would lose, which is the ability to implement new and interesting features as extensions before putting them into core. That doesn't strike me as a benefit, so please explain.
If by SQL syntax we mean things like "ALTER TABLE ENABLE REPLICATION" then it is an absolute user benefit.
Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
