Re: Move postgresql_fdw_validator into dblink

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:33:21PM +0900, Shigeru Hanada wrote:

On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp> wrote:

IIRC, the reason why postgresql_fdw instead of pgsql_fdw was
no other fdw module has shorten naming such as ora_fdw for
Oracle.
However, I doubt whether it is enough strong reason to force to
solve the technical difficulty; naming conflicts with existing user
visible features.
Isn't it worth to consider to back to the pgsql_fdw_validator
naming again?

AFAIR, in the discussion about naming of the new FDW, another
name postgres_fdw was suggested as well as postgresql_fdw, and I
chose the one more familiar to me at that time.  I think that only few
people feel that "postgres" is shortened name of
postgresql.

How about using postgres_fdw for PG-FDW?

I couldn't agree more with Robert's comments[1].  Furthermore, this name only
shows up in calls to {CREATE|ALTER} FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER, which means 99.9% of
users would write "CREATE EXTENSION postgresql_fdw" and never even see the
name.  I'd take "postgresql_fdw_whoops_names_are_a_big_commitment" if it meant
settling this issue 30 days earlier than we'd otherwise settle it.

Notwithstanding, I propose "postgresql.org/contrib/postgresql_fdw/validator".
Since the sole code that ought to reference the name lives in
contrib/postgresql_fdw/*.sql, the verbosity and double-quotation will cause no
appreciable harm.  If anything, it will discourage ill-advised users.

Was there any further progress on this? Committing of the postgresql_fdw seems to be stalled on a naming issue that has a couple of reasonable resolutions available, and it'd be nice to get it in as a contrib module.

https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=940

-- Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services