Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Right. Here's the patch I just knocked up, which seems to Just Work (tm) ;-)

The main objection I can see to this is that you'd get a fairly
unhelpful message if you intended a conninfo string and there was
anything wrong with your syntax (eg, misspelled keyword).  Maybe we
should go with the conn: bit, although really that doesn't seem any
less likely to collide with actual dbnames than the "does it contain
"="" idea.  Anyone have other ideas how to disambiguate?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to