On 26/09/17 12:57, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 26/09/17 09:26, Alvaro Hernandez wrote:
>> On 26/09/17 10:03, Craig Ringer wrote:
>>> On 26 September 2017 at 14:08, Alvaro Hernandez <aht@ongres.com
>>> <mailto:aht@ongres.com>> wrote:
>>> - If you stick to in-core plugins, then you need to support at
>>> least three different output formats if you want to support 9.4+:
>>> test_decoding (and pray it works!), pgoutput, and the "new"
>>> in-core plugin that was proposed at the beginning of this thread,
>>> if that would see the light.
>>>
>>>
>>> The only practical way will IMO be to have whatever new plugin it also
>>> have an out-of-core version maintained for older Pg versions, where it
>>> can be installed.
>>>
>>>
>>> But only in-core plugins help for general-purpose solutions.
>>>
>>>
>>> I still don't agree there. If there's enough need/interest/adoption
>>> you can get cloud vendors on board, they'll feel the customer
>>> pressure. It's not our job to create that pressure and do their work
>>> for them.
>> Don't want to get into a loop, but as I said before it's
>> chicken-and-egg. But nobody is asking core to do their work. As much as
>> I love it, I think logical decoding is a bit half-baked until there is a
>> single, quality, in-core plugin, as it discourages its usage, because of
>> the reasons I stated.
>>
> Well, in that case it's all good as PG10 has that.
>
Even though it's not fully documented, I agree this could fulfill
this gap for 10+ (I assume this plugin will be maintained onwards, at
least to support logical replication).
But what about earlier versions? Any chance it could be backported
down to 9.4? If that would be acceptable, I could probably help/do that...
Álvaro
--
Alvaro Hernandez
-----------
OnGres
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers