Where did we end on this?
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> >> Have you tried it lately? I suspect that you are depending on code that
> >> is not in libpq's current sources anymore. I fully agree with Peter E's
> >> reasons for removing it, too. We do not need to overload the definition
> >> of libpq's dbname parameter.
>
> > Ouch, it *is* documented in ecpg(1). I guess if ecpg wants to provide
> > this syntax (which it probably should, since the "sql connect to" syntax
> > doesn't have any other provisions for host name, port, etc.) then it could
> > take the code from libpq (it's still in there I think) and do the parsing
> > before calling PQsetdbLogin().
>
> That would make sense to me. It would be a good idea to fix the bugs
> you were complaining of in November. The thing that jumped out at me
> in a quick look is that update_db_info is freeing the initial
> conn->dbName before it is done scanning it.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026