From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Is it time to kill support for very old servers? |
Date: | 2017-09-18 11:09:16 |
Message-ID: | 473E2CDB-A8D8-4FCF-9788-84707DA5C1F2@anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On September 18, 2017 4:08:21 AM PDT, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
>wrote:
>>>It seems to me that you are looking more for a connection parameter
>>>here.
>>
>> I'm not seeing a meaningful distinction here? Env vars and connection
>parameters are handled using the same framework in libpq. And using
>the env var in the test would be better, because you'd only set one
>value - hard to do within our non TAP tests (i.e. in an existing psql,
>started by pg regress) otherwise.
>
>Or both? I don't really understand why an environment variable is
>better than a connection string. For the TAP tests, you could just set
>the base of the connection string once and you are done as well. See
>the SSL tests for example.
Did you read what I wrote?
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-18 11:15:31 | Re: Is it time to kill support for very old servers? |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-09-18 11:08:21 | Re: Is it time to kill support for very old servers? |