Justin Clift wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >>Rather than documenting it and thereby locking ourselves into a
> >>misdesigned "feature", I'd vote for removing code and docs too.
> >>We can put the concept on the TODO-for-protocol-change list instead.
> >
> >
> > Other votes?
>
> It seems like we're talking about two slightly different features:
>
> a) A centralised file on a local machine that local client apps can use
> to co-ordinate port numbers and similar through, and
Yes, this is the current functionality.
> b) A "service name" that works across-the-wire. Oracle has something
> like this, and has a "service name lookup daemon" thing in place that
> remote clients can connect to through TCP in order to find out the
> necessary parameters for connecting to a particular service.
>
> We should probably clarify a bit more on things before starting into voting.
It seems strange how you would know where to get that connection info.
I guess it could be used by just specifying the port number and host
name, and some daemon would listen and set params. That seems too
involved to me, though.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
