On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-08-19 09:41:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > In fact, they'd still need to use DNS balancing for Postgres, > > because not everything connects with libpq (think JDBC for instance). > > It already does support this though. > > https://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/head/connect.html : > > > Connection Fail-over > > > > To support simple connection fail-over it is possible to define multiple > > endpoints (host and port pairs) in the connection url separated by > > commas. The driver will try to once connect to each of them in order > > until the connection succeeds. If none succeed, a normal connection > > exception is thrown. > > > > The syntax for the connection url is: > > > > jdbc:postgresql://host1:port1,host2:port2/database > yes, I also wanted to show this, but you was quicker. > > > > So I think we ought to reject this proposal, full stop. I see no > > reason to re-invent this wheel, and there are good reasons not to. > > I don't really buy this argument. Allowing to connect to several > endpoints isn't exactly "new tech" either. A lot of database connectors > do support something very close to the above pgjdbc feature. > mysql, for example. > > Greetings, > > Andres Freund > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
