Hi!
I have a question for the community - why was this patch silently put to a "rejected" status?
Should there no be some kind of explanation?
During this discussion I got the impression that for some reason some members of the community
do not want the TOAST functionality, which has such drawbacks that make it really a curse for
in many ways very good DBMS, to be touched. We cannot get rid of it because of backwards
compatibility, so the best way is to make it more adaptable and extensible - this is what this thread
is about. We proposed our vision on how to extend the TOAST Postgres-way, like Pluggable
Storage some time before.
There are some very complex subjects left in this topic that really need a community' attention.
I've mentioned them above, but there was no feedback on them.
Pavel, we've already had an update implementation for TOAST. But it is a part of a Pluggable
TOAST and it hardly would be here without it. I've started another thread on extending the TOAST
pointer, maybe you would want to participate there [1].
We still would be grateful for feedback.