| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: .ini support for .pgpass |
| Date: | 2011-04-06 13:47:04 |
| Message-ID: | 11602.1302097624@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> 1. More understandable .pgpass format. Yes, I understand our standard
>> format, most people won't. Like JoshB said, hard to debug.
> How about allowing '#'-comments there and putting field
> list into all templates, examples and manpages?
> man 5 pgpass?
> pgpass.sample?
> IOW, do we need to change format or are we having documentation problem?
+1 for seeing this as a documentation problem. I don't think that
converting the file to .ini style is going to somehow make it
magically easier to use --- people still have to understand it,
and frankly .ini format is just another format that not everyone knows.
#-comments seem like a fine idea.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | aaronenabs | 2011-04-06 13:48:37 | Re: Transaction log |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-04-06 13:42:16 | Re: getting to beta |