Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of Thu Nov 24 15:35:36 +0200 2011: > > > Do you suggest that we should reconsider? > > I guess my feeling is that if we're going to have URLs, we ought to > try to adhere to the same conventions that are used for pretty much > every other service that supports URLs. user:pw@host:port is widely > supported by multiple protocols, so I think we would need a very good > reason to decide to go off in a completely different direction. It > would be nice to be compatible with whatever JDBC does (link?) but I'm > not prepared to put that ahead of general good design.
What JDBC supports is rather weird and far from being ideal: http://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/head/connect.html The problem with supporting multiple syntaxes, IMO is that it makes libpq compatible in only one direction: from particular foreign syntax to libpq, but not from libqp to any other particular foreign syntax. So when you see psql -d <URL> you wouldn't know if you can copy that URL to JDBC or any other connection interface parameter, unless you check the docs thoroughly. -- Alex -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
