> Uh, why is it a good idea to overload the "service" option like that?
> ISTM it'd be less confusing to use a separate option. Further I
> that pg_service ought to be handled first, ie, it makes sense to me to
> be able to put both the LDAP name and the LDAP server address(es) into
> pg_service.conf entry. The other way (LDAP pointing to
> is clearly nonsensical, but that doesn't mean that they aren't useful
That idea is much better than my original one.
There could be a pg_service.conf entry like this:
or similar that retrieves a string to be used as connection options.
Would that satisfy everybody (if I use curl instead of openldap)?
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-02-28 15:59:46|
|Subject: Re: bug in 7.3.2 |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-02-28 15:44:32|
|Subject: Re: character encoding in StartupMessage |