Re: ECPG could not connect to the database.

From: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ECPG could not connect to the database.
Date: 2001-01-09 08:54:34
Message-ID: 20010109095434.A15416@feivel.credativ.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:20:42PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > is not in libpq's current sources anymore. I fully agree with Peter E's
> > reasons for removing it, too. We do not need to overload the definition
> > of libpq's dbname parameter.

Why? Sorry, it seems I missed his mail.

> Ouch, it *is* documented in ecpg(1). I guess if ecpg wants to provide
> this syntax (which it probably should, since the "sql connect to" syntax
> doesn't have any other provisions for host name, port, etc.) then it could
> take the code from libpq (it's still in there I think) and do the parsing
> before calling PQsetdbLogin().

This is a possibility of course. But why should this syntax be taken away
from other apps using libpq?

Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael(at)Fam-Meskes(dot)De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Cheng 2001-01-09 09:01:16 xml middleware
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-01-09 07:00:55 Re: WAL questions