On 10/24/16 11:57 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Today, since the host part can't include a
> port specifier, it's regarded as part of the IP address, and I think
> it would probably be a bad idea to change that, as I believe Victor's
> patch would. He seems to have it in mind that we could allow things
> like host=[1:2:3::4:5:6] or host=[1:2:3::4:5]:6, which would might be
> helpful for the future but doesn't avoid changing the meaning of
> connection strings that work today.
Let's keep in mind here that the decision to allow database names to
contain a connection parameter substructure has caused some security
issues. Let's not create more levels of ambiguity and the need to pass
around override flags.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services