2010/12/14 Shigeru HANADA <hanada@metrosystems.co.jp>:
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 15:03:29 +0200
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> I propose the attached API instead. This has a clear separation between
>> plan and execution. I'm sure we'll have to extend the API in the future
>> FDWs want tighter integration, but I think this is a good start. It
>> makes it quite straightforward to write simple FDW like the file FDW,
>> without having to know anything about the executor or planner internals,
>> but provides enough flexibility to cover the functionality in your
>> PostgreSQL FDW.
>
> Thanks for the comments and the proposal.
>
> I've revised fdw_core patch along your proposal and subsequent
> discussion, and tried to fix FDW patches pgsql_fdw and file_fdw
> according to fdw_core.
Reviewing the patch a little, it occurred to me that it might be a
good idea to split the patch into two pieces again. One is for adding
CREATE FOREIGN TABLE syntax and actual creation and the other is for
FDW APIs. ISTM syntax and and utility processing of FOREIGN TABLE has
been stable in the latest patches, and the discussion should be
concentrated on APIs. APIs change don't harm SQL interfaces. Of course
CREATE FOREIGN TABLE is not useful as alone, but it would be helpful
to be reviewed easily.
Regards,
--
Hitoshi Harada