On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 20:09, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hi, > > On 2019-06-08 19:41:34 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote: > > So the reason we are discussing using pgoutput plugin is because it is > part > > of core and guaranteed to be in cloud providers solutions. > > IMO people needing this should then band together and write one that's > suitable, rather than trying to coerce test_decoding and now pgoutput > into something they're not made for. > At the moment it would look a lot like pgoutput. For now I'm fine with no changes to pgoutput other than binary Once we have some real use cases we can look at writing a new one. I would imagine we would actually start with pgoutput and just add to it. Thanks, Dave
