plpq for dblink

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Conway" <mail@joeconway.com>
To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>;
<darko.prenosil@finteh.hr>
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 5:30 PM
Subject: Re: plpq for dblink

Bruce Momjian wrote:

Can someone comment on this code that seems to add plpq to dblink?
Email attached.

My intent was to review this and submit it to to the patches list before
the 7.4 freeze. Unfortunately the array support changes have taken far
longer than I thought (and I'm still not done), and my time has been far
more limited than I had hoped.

Also worth noting is that Shridhar Daithankar started some changes to
dblink that he was interested in, but I've not heard from him in a few
weeks. And relevant is that Darko has since released plpq on gborg and
that version is more up to date than what was sent last October.

Darko, what is your opinion at this point. Should we:
1.) go with the integrated dblink/plpq you sent last October
2.) update the integrated dblink/plpq to the latest version of plpq
3.) create a new contrib for plpq as a stand-alone
4.) none of the above -- leave plpq as a gborg package

What ever You think it is better.
Dblink and plpq are overlaping in some points, but they are also wery
different.
I like to think about plpq as dblink support tool.
I can explain that:
I never used plpq for creating remote views or simple remote queries
because dblink simplifies that kind of work.
I used plpq in critical functions where I had to have more control over
remote transaction,
error codes etc..(we might say in batch scripts like custom replication...)

I have only one strong argument why plpq and dblink should branch and that
is:
plpq is not known, and kind of "forgoten" on gborg.

So, Joe it is Your decission.

Regards !

P.S. sorry for bad English and typing mistakes, I am writing this from my
wifes PC, and
damn spelling checker is not working !!!