On Friday 01 April 2011 02.39:25 Christopher Browne wrote:
> An advantage to this uri form is that it allows applications to be
> configured uniformly - I do not need to ask "is this using libpq, needing
> one sort of configuration, or Java, needing another?"
> Rather, I may say, "here is a uri I may use with any of my applications"
Since URI stings are popular, it might really make sense if pg could
recommend a preferred form of postgres URI strings (and obviously implement
it in libpq). For the non-libpq APIs (there's at least
http://python.projects.postgresql.org/, don't know about others), it would
still be just a recommendation that they could follow or not follow, so the
situation wouldn't change too much from today, I fear.
East Indians sometimes see Heaven as a giant bureaucracy, and frequently
report being sent back because of clerical errors.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Noah Misch||Date: 2011-04-01 07:52:22|
|Subject: Re: maximum digits for NUMERIC|
|Previous:||From: Brendan Jurd||Date: 2011-04-01 05:51:54|
|Subject: Re: Keywords in pg_hba.conf should be field-specific|