Excerpts from Greg Smith's message of Mon Nov 28 10:08:42 +0200 2011: > > On 11/24/2011 05:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > A coworker also suggested using a different designator: > > > > postgresqli:///path/to/socket:5433/database > > postgresqli://:5433/database > > This is not unprecedented. An example is how CUPS handles this problem > when connecting printers using URIs: > http://www.cups.org/documentation.php/network.html where you might see > this for the usual port: > > lpd://ip-address-or-hostname/queue > > And this for AppSocket AKA JetDirect: > > socket://ip-address-or-hostname > > I am certainly not going to defend printing setup with CUPS as a model > worth emulating, just noting the similarity here. I think we'll save > miles of user headaches if there's only one designator.
I'm not a big fan of using different designator for local socket connections either, especially if they differ so little (the added 'i' might be too hard to spot, moreso if the displayed using proportional font.) Not to mention that printers and compatibility don't go together that often, in my (probably way too limited) experience. ;-) As it was suggested downthread, "postgresql://[:port]/[mydb]" should work perfectly for this purpose, since it's just a matter of allowing empty host/addr in the URI. So, using the default port: "postgresql:///mydb" (notice the similarity with the local-filesystem URI scheme: "file:///") Speaking of JDBC, the "postgresql:///mydb" notation may be abbreviated as "postgresql:mydb", which is not unreasonable to support in psql too. -- Regards, Alex -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
