Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > While writing some code that takes a connstring and adds some parameters, I > noticed that PQconninfoParse doesn't play well with PQconnectdbParams.
> PQconnectdbParams takes a pair of equal-length arrays, one for keys and one > for values, each terminated by null elements. But PQconninfoParse returns > a an array of PQconninfoOption . > This means the client has to do a bunch of fiddling to turn a parsed > conninfo into something that can be passed to PQconnectdbParams . This > seems bizarre. Am I missing something obvious? Um, I don't see the connection. Under what circumstances would you want to pass the result of PQconninfoParse directly to PQconnectdbParams? PQconninfoOption is intended to provide a lot of secondary information about the available options, so it's more in the nature of an informational record than something you would feed back into the library. > libpq internally uses connectOptions1 which calls parse_connection_string, > the same function used by PQconninfoParse. But there's no connect variant > exposed to users to use it. > Anyone object to adding one? This seems more like exposing library implementation details than adding useful functionality. In particular, I object to using PQconninfoOption as an input data structure to the library, because then you'd have a bunch of definitional questions about which fields of that struct the client app is expected to make valid, plus the potential for well-hidden bugs if some part of the library unintentionally relies on a field it shouldn't when looking at a PQconninfoOption that came from outside the library rather than inside. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers