Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
> We could just use the dummy wrapper and set an
> option for the foreign data wrapper that tells what options are valid. That
> is, you would say
>
> CREATE FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER postgresql_dummy LIBRARY 'dummy_fdw' LANGUAGE C
> OPTIONS (valid_options '{host,port,dbname,user,password...}');
Looks reasonable, but is 'dummy_fdw' a proper name for it?
I think 'template_fdw' or something might be better.
If we will complete 'postgres_fdw' as a replacement of dblink, the fdw
will not need the flexibility because it should accept only valid
parameters for PostgreSQL. Then, 'dummy_fdw' might be kept only for
user-defined FDWs. Since users see the library name, we'd better to
choose more suitable name for it.
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
