Re: Inconsistency in libpq connection parameters, and extension thereof

Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> writes:

> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>
>> Um.  We oughta fix that.  I'm not necessarily wedded to the old
>> throw-an-error definition, but there seems no good reason for these
>> two syntaxes to act inconsistently.
>
> I agree with that.  The URIs may have been done this way as a
> concession to some small fragmentation that may have taken place
> before URIs were standardized, but perhaps the author can speak to
> that (he has been put on the To: list for this mail).

Sorry for the silence.

The original intent was to not error out on any extra parameters from
JDBC or other existing URI implementations.  The example of a possible
typo in sslmode=require clearly demonstrates that this was not
a well-thought decision.

Anyway, I can see you've already sorted this out.

--
Alex