Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> TBH, I think that this patch itself was a bad idea and should be reverted.
>> I don't object to changing APIs used by external modules when there's a
>> good reason to break them, but having looked at this patch all I see is
>> change for the sake of change. What new functionality have you introduced?
> If you look at the TABLESAMPLE patch, separating the block sampling
> into a separate facility makes quite some sense.
Sure, but there was no need to break FDWs that were using an API that
was perfectly reasonable for ANALYZE support.
Had you not made random changes to the argument lists, we could have
solved this with some compatibility macros...
>> Or to put it more baldly: it's likely that you've broken quite a large
>> number of third-party FDWs, not just this one. A lot of people have
>> probably copied-and-pasted what was in the contrib FDWs.
> make_foreignscan() has been changed as well by 1a8a4e5c..
The difference there was that that was specifically adding a new feature
of value to FDWs. This is just drive-by breakage.
regards, tom lane