| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Thoughts on a "global" client configuration? |
| Date: | 2025-10-15 19:49:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+mXwkvxfxoigs2Exh14fOE6x13eaRVgR2bOEDN0uxmFCw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 12:35 PM Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Maybe have a way to specify one or more "base" configurations for each service?
For the use case I have in mind, my intention is that you shouldn't
have to use a service at all to get these defaults to apply.
> [service1] extends default
> host=postgres.example.com
> user=appuser
Nested services is interesting as well. I don't think it solves my use
case, because of a very subtle difference between defaults and
services (I intend to go into more detail in the other email I'm
typing up now).
> I don't know how big a deal it is that this is no longer an "INI" file.
We would almost certainly break some libpq-compatible software if we
added new syntax. I don't know if that's a feature or a bug yet, but I
do think it's avoidable, so I'm going to try to avoid it for now.
Needs more thought.
Thanks!
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Arseniy Mukhin | 2025-10-15 19:53:38 | Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY |
| Previous Message | Isaac Morland | 2025-10-15 19:35:36 | Re: Thoughts on a "global" client configuration? |