On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 1/19/17 12:47 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote: >> 4. There is some controversy on where implemented feature shall be: in >> separate extension (as in this patch), in db_link, in some PL API, in FDW or >> somewhere else. I think that new extension is an appropriate place for the >> feature. But I’m not certain. > > I suppose we should decide first whether we want pg_background as a > separate extension or rather pursue extending dblink as proposed elsewhere. > > I don't know if pg_background allows any use case that dblink can't > handle (yet).
For the record, I have no big problem with extending dblink to allow this instead of adding pg_background. But I think we should try to get one or the other done in time for this release. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
