Re: Allow specifying a dbname in pg_basebackup connection string - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jelte Fennema-Nio
Subject Re: Allow specifying a dbname in pg_basebackup connection string
Date
Msg-id CAGECzQTwvS_RZi347j2sbUhe2ieaz-tKe=pQu+=h5iftPkSJfQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Allow specifying a dbname in pg_basebackup connection string  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 at 18:14, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> perhaps under the illusion that dbname and connection_string can't
> both be NULL.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I didn't realise that was an option. I think I
probably misinterpreted this comment (might be nice to clarify there
that both being NULL is also a valid option):

    /* pg_recvlogical uses dbname only; others use connection_string only. */
    Assert(dbname == NULL || connection_string == NULL);


> I think the attached will fix it, but I wonder if there are edge
> cases I'm not thinking of.

Yeah that patch looks good to me. Reading the patch carefully again I
cannot think there are other changes in behaviour (except the ones
intended by the change).



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ranier Vilela
Date:
Subject: Re: define pg_structiszero(addr, s, r)
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix a typo in the comment of gistdoinsert()