Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq

From: Cédric Villemain <cedric(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>, Alex Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq
Date: 2012-02-25 19:37:01
Message-ID: 201202252037.02330.cedric@2ndquadrant.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Le vendredi 24 février 2012 14:18:44, Florian Weimer a écrit :
> * Alex Shulgin:
> >> It's ugly, but it's standard practice, and seems better than a separate
> >> -d parameter (which sort of defeats the purpose of URIs).
> >
> > Hm, do you see anything what's wrong with "?dbname=other" if you don't
> > like a separate -d?
>
> It's not nice URI syntax, but it's better than an out-of-band mechanism.

I've not followed all the mails about this feature but I don't find it is a
nice syntax too.

"?dbname=other" looks like dbname is an argument, but dbname is a requirement
for postgresql connexion.

--
Cédric Villemain +33 (0)6 20 30 22 52
http://2ndQuadrant.fr/
PostgreSQL: Support 24x7 - Développement, Expertise et Formation

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Cédric Villemain 2012-02-25 20:03:18 Re: VACUUM ANALYZE is faster than ANALYZE?
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2012-02-25 19:16:34 Re: CLOG contention, part 2