| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter van Hardenberg <pvh(at)pvh(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |
| Date: | 2016-10-24 20:15:41 |
| Message-ID: | ed0f268e-8313-872b-95b6-deaba725252f@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
On 10/24/16 11:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Today, since the host part can't include a
> port specifier, it's regarded as part of the IP address, and I think
> it would probably be a bad idea to change that, as I believe Victor's
> patch would. He seems to have it in mind that we could allow things
> like host=[1:2:3::4:5:6] or host=[1:2:3::4:5]:6, which would might be
> helpful for the future but doesn't avoid changing the meaning of
> connection strings that work today.
Let's keep in mind here that the decision to allow database names to
contain a connection parameter substructure has caused some security
issues. Let's not create more levels of ambiguity and the need to pass
around override flags.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan Katz | 2016-10-24 20:39:26 | Re: Press Release Draft - 2016-10-27 Cumulative Update |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-10-24 20:10:32 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-10-24 20:40:14 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2016-10-24 20:10:32 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |