Hi @bladefist, thanks for the interest in Cockroch! You make an excellent point about the importance of compatibility with the larger PG ecosystem, and this is a stance most of the engineers at Cockroach share.
The reason that getting these tools up and running has taken time is that they often stress a huge amount of PG’s surface area. As such, in order to get them working with Cockroach we need to achieve parity with a significant number of Postgres features - features that have been developed over a span of 20 years. This parity ranges from mirroring the PG wire protocol to mirroring its syntax, its internal schema hierarchy, its introspection catalogs, its error handling behavior across various scenarios, and a number of more esoteric features and PG idiosyncrasies. This has been a long climb, but we are still actively moving in the right direction. For instance, just last night we landed a major change that implements https://github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach/pull/21456, which should move us one more large step closer to full compatibility.
You also brought up the Oct `18 estimation. The reason for this is because that is the tentative date for our next major release. This release is slated to have support for a new query optimizer which is actively under development and can be followed here. This new optimizer will allow us to overcome some of the few remaining hurdles (notably correlated subqueries) on our way to compatibility with a number of tools.
TLDR; we hear you, we agree, and we’re actively working on it!