On 09/22/2010 07:20 AM, Dave Page wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Andrew Dunstan<and...@dunslane.net> wrote:
On 09/22/2010 04:54 AM, Dave Page wrote:
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Andrew Dunstan<and...@dunslane.net>
wrote:
The ini file format is not flexible enough, IMNSHO. If we're going to
adopt
a new config file format it should have these characteristics, among
others:
well known (let's not invent a new one)
supports hierarchical structure
reasonably readable
The ini format meets all of those requirements - and it's certainly
far more readable/editable than XML and friends.
No, it's really not hierarchical. It only has goes one level deep.
I guess pgAdmin/wxWidgets are broken then :-)
[Servers]
Count=5
[Servers/1]
Server=localhost
Description=PostgreSQL 8.3
ServiceID=
DiscoveryID=/PostgreSQL/8.3
Port=5432
StorePwd=true
Restore=false
Database=postgres
Username=postgres
LastDatabase=postgres
LastSchema=public
DbRestriction=
Colour=#FFFFFF
SSL=0
Group=PPAS
Rolename=
[Servers/1/Databases]
[Servers/1/Databases/postgres]
SchemaRestriction=
[Servers/1/Databases/pphq]
SchemaRestriction=
[Servers/1/Databases/template_postgis]
SchemaRestriction=
[Servers/2]
...
...
Well, that's not what I'd call a hierarchy, in any sane sense. I've
often had to dig all over the place in ini files to find related bits of
information in disparate parts of the file. Compared to a meaningful
tree structure this is utterly woeful. In a sensible hierarchical
format, all the information relating to, say, Servers/1 above, wopuld be
under a stanza with that heading, instead of having separate and
unnested stanzas like Servers/1/Databases/template_postgis.
If you could nest stanzas in ini file format it would probably do, but
you can't, leading to the above major ugliness.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
