Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Uh, is that actually a true statement? �I thought the result *did*
>> include default values. �That's more or less the point of returning them
>> all, after all.
> Well, then I'm confused, because you and Dmitriy seem to be saying
> opposite things.
[ after experimenting with the code ... ] Oh, I had been thinking that
PQconndefaults gives the same result as PQconninfoParse with an
empty-string argument, but that's not the case. Indeed, the former
fills in default values as current values, but the latter does not.
The proposed wording change seems reasonable, except that "have a
corresponding value" seems a bit vague. Maybe better "have a non-null
val field".
regards, tom lane
