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
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.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
