Le 29/12/2009 14:12, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> Le 29/12/2009 00:03, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
>> Le 28/12/2009 22:59, Tom Lane a écrit :
>>> Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> writes:
>>>> Le 28/12/2009 17:06, Tom Lane a écrit :
>>>>> I think we were stalled on the question of whether to use one array
>>>>> or two parallel arrays. Do you want to try coding up a sample usage
>>>>> of each possibility so we can see which one seems more useful?
>>>
>>>> I'm interested in working on this. But I don't find the thread that talk
>>>> about this.
>>>
>>> Try here
>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4AAE8CCF.9070808@esilo.com
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. I've read all the "new version of PQconnectdb" and "Determining
>> client_encoding from client locale" threads. I think I understand the
>> goal. Still need to re-read this one
>> (http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/6222.1253734019@sss.pgh.pa.us) and
>> completely understand it (will probably need to look at the code, at
>> least the PQconnectdb one). But I'm definitely working on this.
>>
>
> If I try to sum up my readings so far, this is what we still have to do:
>
> 1. try the one-array approach
> PGconn *PQconnectParams(const char **params)
>
> 2. try the two-arrays approach
> PGconn *PQconnectParams(const char **keywords, const char **values)
>
> Instead of doing a wrapper around PQconnectdb, we need to refactor the
> whole function, so that we can get rid of the parsing of the conninfo
> string (which is quite complicated).
>
> Using psql as an example would be a good idea, AFAICT.
>
> Am I right? did I misunderstand or forget something?
>
I supposed I was right since noone yell at me :)
I worked on this tonight. You'll find two patches attached, one for the
one-array approach, one for the two-arrays approach. I know some more
factoring can be done (at least, the "get the fallback resources..."
part). I'm OK to do them. I just need to know if I'm on the right track.
--
Guillaume.
http://www.postgresqlfr.org
http://dalibo.com