Tom Lane wrote:
> "Larry Rosenman" <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> writes:
>> What's the harm of a (pseudo code):
>> const char *PQgetunixsocketdir(void)
>> In libpq, and a psql command line switch to call it.
> By the time you get done adding the infrastructure and documentation
> for those two layers of features, you're talking about many hundreds
> of lines of stuff, not four. There are also definitional issues
> (what does this do on platforms without Unix sockets) and future
> proofing (will we always have DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR). So "what's the
> harm" is not the appropriate measure --- especially when this
> proposal clearly doesn't help in a lot of the scenarios in which one
> might wish to know the information.
I know that it's not just the 4 line function, etc. However, there is
no way to find out if that non-standard setting has been changed. Is it
safe to assume
that we will always have a "default" unix socket that we connect to if no
hostname is specified?
However, as I said a couple of messages back, this isn't gonna fly, based on
so I'm gonna drop it.
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3683 US
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: vidisha.shah||Date: 2006-03-29 05:09:25|
|Subject: Unable to Query the datatype varchar of PostgreSQL Server|
|Previous:||From: Larry Rosenman||Date: 2006-03-29 04:47:32|
|Subject: Re: Exposing DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR via a libpq function? |