On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 1/19/17 12:47 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
>>> 4. There is some controversy on where implemented feature shall be: in 
>>> separate extension (as in this patch), in db_link, in some PL API, in FDW 
>>> or somewhere else. I think that new extension is an appropriate place for 
>>> the feature. But I’m not certain.
>> I suppose we should decide first whether we want pg_background as a
>> separate extension or rather pursue extending dblink as proposed elsewhere.
>> I don't know if pg_background allows any use case that dblink can't
>> handle (yet).
> For the record, I have no big problem with extending dblink to allow
> this instead of adding pg_background.  But I think we should try to
> get one or the other done in time for this release.

Moved to CF 2017-03 as the discussion is not over yet.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to