Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:02 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

>
> On 26 October 2015 at 16:25, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> On 10/14/15 6:41 AM, Victor Wagner wrote:
>> > 1. It is allowed to specify several hosts in the connect string, either
>> > in URL-style (separated by comma) or in param=value form (several host
>> > parameters).
>>
>> I'm not fond of having URLs that are not valid URLs according to the
>> applicable standards. Because then they can't be parsed or composed by
>> standard libraries.
>>
>> Also, this assumes that all the components other than host and port are
>> the same. Earlier there was a discussion about why the ports would ever
>> need to be different. Well, why can't the database names be different?
>> I could have use for that.
>>
>> I think you should just accept multiple URLs.
>>
>
> I'd give a "+1" on this...
>
> As an area of new behaviour, I don't see a big problem with declining to
> support every wee bit of libpq configuration, and instead requiring the
> use of URLs.
>
> Trying to put "multiplicities" into each parameter (and then considering
> it at the pg_service level, too) is WAY more complicated, and for a
> feature where it seems to me that it is pretty reasonable to have a
> series of fully qualified URLs.
>
> Specifying several URLs should be easier to understand, easier to
> test, easier to code, and easier to keep from blowing up badly.
>

Setting aside all other concerns, have a +1 from me on that too.

--
Alex