On 11/16/2012 08:08 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:33:21PM +0900, Shigeru Hanada wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Kohei KaiGai <kai...@kaigai.gr.jp> wrote:
>>> IIRC, the reason why postgresql_fdw instead of pgsql_fdw was
>>> no other fdw module has shorten naming such as ora_fdw for
>>> Oracle.
>>> However, I doubt whether it is enough strong reason to force to
>>> solve the technical difficulty; naming conflicts with existing user
>>> visible features.
>>> Isn't it worth to consider to back to the pgsql_fdw_validator
>>> naming again?
>> AFAIR, in the discussion about naming of the new FDW, another
>> name postgres_fdw was suggested as well as postgresql_fdw, and I
>> chose the one more familiar to me at that time. I think that only few
>> people feel that "postgres" is shortened name of
>> postgresql.
>>
>> How about using postgres_fdw for PG-FDW?
> I couldn't agree more with Robert's comments[1]. Furthermore, this name only
> shows up in calls to {CREATE|ALTER} FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER, which means 99.9% of
> users would write "CREATE EXTENSION postgresql_fdw" and never even see the
> name. I'd take "postgresql_fdw_whoops_names_are_a_big_commitment" if it meant
> settling this issue 30 days earlier than we'd otherwise settle it.
>
> Notwithstanding, I propose "postgresql.org/contrib/postgresql_fdw/validator".
> Since the sole code that ought to reference the name lives in
> contrib/postgresql_fdw/*.sql, the verbosity and double-quotation will cause no
> appreciable harm. If anything, it will discourage ill-advised users.
Was there any further progress on this? Committing of the postgresql_fdw
seems to be stalled on a naming issue that has a couple of reasonable
resolutions available, and it'd be nice to get it in as a contrib module.
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=940
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
