On 2017-05-04 17:33:13 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote: > On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >> I didn't think logical decoding was really more than a proof-of-concept > >> until now. > > > > /me searches for jaw on floor.
Yea, this kind of argument is getting really old. People, including Robert and I in this thread, have spent tremendous amounts of work on it. Not fun to just get that discounted. > > I would not in any way refer to logical decoding as being only a proof > > of concept, even before logical replication. > > That's fair, but I think I understand what Bruce was going for here. > Data point: github third party modules are generally not approved for > deployment in my organization so logical decoding from a production > perspective does not exist (for me) until 10.0. Point being, an > important threshold has been crossed. By that argument the extension APIs, which after all are what external FDWs, external index types, postgis, and other extensions use, aren't a feature of postgres. Some sites not being able to use external extensions is *one* argument for building some things into core, but that doesn't mean the extension APIs don't exist or aren't features. - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
