From: | Adrian von Bidder <avbidder(at)fortytwo(dot)ch> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Should psql support URI syntax? |
Date: | 2011-04-01 07:12:54 |
Message-ID: | 201104010916.18566@fortytwo.ch |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heyho!
On Friday 01 April 2011 02.39:25 Christopher Browne wrote:
> An advantage to this uri form is that it allows applications to be
> configured uniformly - I do not need to ask "is this using libpq, needing
> one sort of configuration, or Java, needing another?"
>
> Rather, I may say, "here is a uri I may use with any of my applications"
Since URI stings are popular, it might really make sense if pg could
recommend a preferred form of postgres URI strings (and obviously implement
it in libpq). For the non-libpq APIs (there's at least
http://python.projects.postgresql.org/, don't know about others), it would
still be just a recommendation that they could follow or not follow, so the
situation wouldn't change too much from today, I fear.
cheers
-- vbi
--
East Indians sometimes see Heaven as a giant bureaucracy, and frequently
report being sent back because of clerical errors.
<http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/01/culture_and_neardeath_experien.php>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2011-04-01 07:52:22 | Re: maximum digits for NUMERIC |
Previous Message | Brendan Jurd | 2011-04-01 05:51:54 | Re: Keywords in pg_hba.conf should be field-specific |