Re: Patch for TNS services

From: Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>
To: Postgres Hacker Lister <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch for TNS services
Date: 2000-09-12 16:39:54
Message-ID: 00091218395400.00901@linux
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Yes, I will try to make it this weekend when I've time.

Am Die, 12 Sep 2000 schrieben Sie:
> Sounds like people want it. Can you polish it off, add SGML docs and
> send it over?
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >
> > Last week I created a patch for the Postgres client side libraries to
> > allow something like a (not so mighty) form of Oracle TNS, but nobody
> > showed any interest. Currently, the patch is not perfect yet, but works
> > fine for us. I want to avoid improving the patch if there is no interest
> > in it, so if you think it might be a worthy improvement please drop me a
> > line.
> >
> > It works like this:
> > The patch allows to supply another parameter to the Postgres connect
> > string, called "service". So, instead of having a connect string (e.g. in
> > PHP) like "dbname=foo host=bar port=5433 user=foouser password=barpass"
> > the string would be
> > "service=stupid_name_here"
> > or more often
> > "service=stupid_name_here user=foouser password=barpass"
> >
> > There's a config file /etc/pg_service.conf, having an entry like:
> > [stupid_name_here]
> > dbname=foo
> > host=bar
> > port=5433
> > ....
> >
> > The advantage is you can go from one database host, database, port or
> > whatever without having to touch the scripts or applications. We're
> > currently in the process of migrating all of our PHP and Python scripts
> > to another from localhost, port 5433 to another machine, port 5432 and
> > it's not something I ever want to do again, I'd to change around 100
> > files and I'm still not sure if I've missed one.
> >
> > The patch is client-side only, around 100 lines, needs no changes to the
> > backend and is compatible with all applications supplying a connection
> > string (not using PQsetdblogin)
> >
> > - --
> > Why is it always Segmentation's fault?
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: 2.6.3i
> > Charset: noconv
> >
> > iQCVAwUBOa1MsQotfkegMgnVAQEIsAP+Na72pNdT+RoQcjuX5cn1TKkPlNAh9BV5
> > kCNP+Zui6WfZSiA8RYPuruXF0QyEMPZZD6AI9Wqr5sQ75kVSb65uOt9rLrdS0bxA
> > WTClNjlLKG3Rk1IGSFBm+C0p8lcA3AYTohHLhHB3q+WeLTneI5lJfwpo2AWyinQt
> > 0k/1r6EwpUk=
> > =+skX
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> [ Attachment, skipping... ]

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-09-12 16:45:28 Re: Weird function behavior from Sept 11 snapshot
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-09-12 16:39:04 Re: Weird function behavior from Sept 11 snapshot