PostgreSQL <-> Babelfish integration

    I would like to share my thoughts in the list about the potential
PostgreSQL <-> Babelfish integration. There is already a thread about
protocol hooks [1], but I'd like to offer my PoV from a higher level
perspective and keep that thread for the technical aspects of the
protocol hooks. This is also a follow-up on a public blog post I
recently published [2], and the feedback I received to bring the topic
to the ML.

    As I stated in the mentioned post, I believe Babelfish is a very
welcomed addition to the PostgreSQL ecosystem. It allows PostgreSQL to
reach other users, other use cases, other markets; something which in my
opinion PostgreSQL really needs to extend its reach, to become a more
relevant player in the database market. The potential is there,
specially given all the extensibility points that PostgreSQL already
has, which are unparalleled in the industry.

    I believe we should engage in a conversation, with AWS included,
about how we can possibly benefit from this integration. It must be
symbiotic, both "parties" should win with it, otherwise it won't work.
But I believe it can definitely be a win-win situation. There has been
some concerns that this may be for Amazon's own benefit, and would
suppose an increased maintenance burden for the PostgreSQL Community. I
believe that analysis is not including the many benefits that such a
compatibility for PostgreSQL would bring in many fronts. And possibly,
the changes required to core, are beneficial for other areas of
PostgreSQL. Several have already pointed out in the extensibility hooks
thread that this could allow for new protocols into PostgreSQL,
including the much desired v4 or an HTTP one. I can only strongly second
that, and we should also analyze it from this perspective.

    There is also a risk factor that I believe needs to be factored into
the analysis, and is what is the risk of not doing anything. From my
understanding, it is very clear that AWS wants to treat Babelfish as a
kind of development branch, waiting for inclusion into mainline. But I
also believe, if this branch sits forever not merged, at some point, may
be under the risk of having its own life, becoming a fork. And if it
does, it may become our "MariaDB". I would not like this to happen.

    I'm happy to contribute what I can to this discussion: if we want
Babelfish to be integrated, how, analyze pros and cons, etc. I see this
as an incredible gift that, if managed properly, not only will make
PostgreSQL much better in use-cases that cannot access now; but may also
boost PostgreSQL's extensibility even further, and maybe even spark
development of some projects (like v4 or HTTP protocol) that have been
longer dismissed because there were (logically) too many requisites for
any v3 replacement, that made its replacement extremely hard.

    But of course, these are just the humble 2 cents of a casual
-hackers reader.


    Álvaro


[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAGBW59d5SjLyJLt-jwNv%2BoP6esbD8SCB%3D%3D%3D11WVe5%3DdOHLQ5wQ%40mail.gmail.com
[2] https://postgresql.fund/blog/babelfish-the-elephant-in-the-room/

--

Alvaro Hernandez


-----------
OnGres