Re: Should psql support URI syntax?
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, jd@commandprompt.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-04-01T12:13:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 04/01/2011 04:34 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 10:24, Dave Page<dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Joshua Berkus<josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>>> I would think it would be purely syntatic sugar really, which does >>>> incorporate a familiar interface for those who are working in >>>> different >>>> worlds (.Net/Drupal/JAVA) etc... >>> I wouldn't mind having something more standard supported; I'm always looking up the conninfo for the options I don't use frequently. >> I have a sneaking suspicion that the options you have to look up won't >> be any more obvious (or standardized) in a URI connection string. >> >> That said, I do support adding this in the future, if only to keep up >> with the Jones'. > So are the ones out there *already* even compatible, before we start > adding our own? For example, for JDBC I beleive it has to be > jdbc:postgresql://blahblah... Even if you can say the jdbc part is > protocol specific, the example quoted by JD had pgsql://. How many > other combinations can we find already out in the wild, and how do we > pick which one to use in this case? > Of course they aren't compatible. So we solve that by just adding to the soup! cheers andrew