Message-ID: <3F1BFD36.70200@joeconway.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 07:48:22 -0700
From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
	rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>,
 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <postgres@cybertec.at>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, EG <EG@cybertec.at>
Subject: Re: dblink_ora - a first shot on Oracle ...
References: <200307211339.h6LDdTR00206@candle.pha.pa.us>
	<4455.1058796993@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <4455.1058796993@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tom Lane wrote:
> I tend to agree with Peter: if dblink is going to start depending on
> stuff outside Postgres, it ought to be become a separate project,
> if only to simplify distribution and configuration issues.
> 
> Perhaps it could be split into two parts, a PG-specific part and
> a cross-DBMS part?
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> PS: Has anyone looked any further at the SQL-MED standard?  ISTM that's
> where we ought to head in the long run.

I think for that very reason (SQL-MED) we need to come to terms with 
this issue. If/when connections to external data sources is in the 
backend, you'll have those exact same dependencies. And in fact, we do 
today: consider '--with-openssl' or '--with-tcl'.

I had always assumed we would need '--with-oracle', '--with-jdbc',  etc 
(or whatever you want to call them) to support backend connections to 
external sources. And this discussion is the very reason I was hesitant 
to pursue dblink_ora or jdbclink now, because I didn't think people 
would be comfortable with configure options to support a contrib library.

Joe