On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On 10/22/12 11:47 AM, Phil Sorber wrote: > Also, it seems that about 75% of the patch is connection options processing. > How about > we get rid of all that and just have them specify a connection string? It > would be a break > with tradition, but maybe it's time for something new.
I'd be pretty pleased if it had just two ways to get configured: a) A connection string (which might, in the new order of things, be a JDBC-like URI), or b) Environment values drawn in from PGHOST/PGPORT/... That's pretty much enough configurability, I'd think. > Functionality: > > I'm missing the typical ping functionality to ping continuously. If we're > going to call > it pg_ping, it ought to do something similar to ping, I think. Yep, should have equivalents to: -i, an interval between pings, -c, a count -w/-W, a timeout interval Might be nice to have analogues to: -D printing timestamp before each line -q quiets output -v verbose output (got it, check!) -V version (got it, check!) -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
