Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch: libpq new connect function (PQconnectParams)

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch: libpq new connect function (PQconnectParams)
Date: 2010-01-25 23:04:43
Message-ID: 4B5E238B.1040801@joeconway.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
I'm reviewing the patch posted here:
  http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-01/msg01579.php
for this commitfest item:
  https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=259

Patch attached - a few minor changes:
-------------------------------------
1) Updated to apply cleanly against cvs tip
2) Improved comments
3) Moved much of what was in PQconnectStartParams() to a new
   conninfo_array_parse() to be more consistent with existing code

Questions/comments:
-------------------
a) Do we want an analog to PQconninfoParse(), e.g.
   PQconninfoParseParams()? If not, it isn't worth keeping use_defaults
   as an argument to conninfo_array_parse().
b) I refrained from further consolidation even though there is room.
   For example, I considered leaving only the real parsing code in
   conninfo_parse(), and having it return keywords and values arrays.
   If we did that, the rest of the code could be modified to accept
   keywords and values instead of conninfo, and therefore shared. I was
   concerned about the probably small performance hit to the existing
   code path. Thoughts?
c) Obviously I liked the "two-arrays approach" better -- any objections
   to that?

Thanks,

Joe

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2010-01-25 23:21:29
Subject: Re: Patch: libpq new connect function (PQconnectParams)
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-01-25 22:36:46
Subject: Re: C function accepting/returning cstring vs. text

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group