Re: Docs for service file

From: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Docs for service file
Date: 2003-01-07 18:18:43
Message-ID: 3E1B1A03.6050605@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>Rather than documenting it and thereby locking ourselves into a
>>misdesigned "feature", I'd vote for removing code and docs too.
>>We can put the concept on the TODO-for-protocol-change list instead.
>
>
> Other votes?

It seems like we're talking about two slightly different features:

a) A centralised file on a local machine that local client apps can use
to co-ordinate port numbers and similar through, and

b) A "service name" that works across-the-wire. Oracle has something
like this, and has a "service name lookup daemon" thing in place that
remote clients can connect to through TCP in order to find out the
necessary parameters for connecting to a particular service.

We should probably clarify a bit more on things before starting into voting.

:-)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-07 18:22:20 Re: Docs for service file
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-07 18:06:06 Re: Docs for service file