| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Alexander Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Notes on implementing URI syntax for libpq |
| Date: | 2011-11-24 13:54:24 |
| Message-ID: | 1322142742-sup-8349@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Martijn van Oosterhout's message of jue nov 24 04:40:42 -0300 2011:
> How about the "service" option, that's a nice way of handling
> non-default socket options.
What about it? Are you suggesting we should support some way to specify
a service name in the URI?
If so, consider this: if you set up a pg_service.conf file, and then
pass around a URI that specifies a service, no one else can use the URI
until you also pass around the service file.
So, in that light, do we still think that letting the user specify a
service name in the URI makes sense? (My personal opinion is yes).
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-11-24 13:54:31 | Re: Storing hot members of PGPROC out of the band |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-11-24 13:52:03 | Re: Notes on implementing URI syntax for libpq |