Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>
To: Alex Shulgin <ash(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq
Date: 2012-02-24 13:18:44
Message-ID: 82fwe0z7wr.fsf@mid.bfk.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* 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.

--
Florian Weimer <fweimer(at)bfk(dot)de>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kohei KaiGai 2012-02-24 13:20:25 Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label
Previous Message Alex Shulgin 2012-02-24 13:16:53 Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq