Re: Exposing DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR via a libpq function?
От | Larry Rosenman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Exposing DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR via a libpq function? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 000101c652ec$8ef8b020$0202fea9@lerctr.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Exposing DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR via a libpq function? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > "Larry Rosenman" <ler@lerctr.org> writes: >> What's the harm of a (pseudo code): > >> const char *PQgetunixsocketdir(void) >> { >> return(DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR) >> } > >> In libpq, and a psql command line switch to call it. > > By the time you get done adding the infrastructure and documentation > for those two layers of features, you're talking about many hundreds > of lines of stuff, not four. There are also definitional issues > (what does this do on platforms without Unix sockets) and future > proofing (will we always have DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR). So "what's the > harm" is not the appropriate measure --- especially when this > proposal clearly doesn't help in a lot of the scenarios in which one > might wish to know the information. I know that it's not just the 4 line function, etc. However, there is currentlyno way to find out if that non-standard setting has been changed. Is it safe to assumethat we will always have a "default" unix socket that we connect to if no hostname is specified? However, as I said a couple of messages back, this isn't gonna fly, based on your objections,so I'm gonna drop it. -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler@lerctr.org US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3683 US
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: