Thread: localpipe

localpipe

From

Peter Eisentraut

Date:

24 February 2006, 08:44:22

pgAdmin talks about a <localpipe>, but the thing is in fact a local
socket, not a pipe.  I suggest the following change.


--- src/base/pgConnBase.cpp     (Revision 5031)
+++ src/base/pgConnBase.cpp     (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -259,7 +259,7 @@
 {
     wxString str;
     if (dbHost.IsEmpty())
-        str.Printf(_("%s on <localpipe>"), dbname.c_str());
+        str.Printf(_("%s on local socket"), dbname.c_str());
     else
         str.Printf(_("%s on %s:%d"), dbname.c_str(), dbHost.c_str(), GetPort());
     return str;


--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

Re: localpipe

From

"Dave Page"

Date:

27 February 2006, 08:08:35


> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of
> Peter Eisentraut
> Sent: 24 February 2006 09:45
> To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] localpipe
>
> pgAdmin talks about a <localpipe>, but the thing is in fact a local
> socket, not a pipe.  I suggest the following change.

Thanks, patch applied.

Regards, Dave

Re: localpipe

From

Andreas Pflug

Date:

27 February 2006, 15:47:03

Dave Page wrote:
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
>>[mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of
>>Peter Eisentraut
>>Sent: 24 February 2006 09:45
>>To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
>>Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] localpipe
>>
>>pgAdmin talks about a <localpipe>, but the thing is in fact a local
>>socket, not a pipe.  I suggest the following change.

Hm, easily mixed up with localhost, which uses a socket too. But we
don't have the space for 'local unix socket' either.

Regards,
Andreas

Re: localpipe

From

"Dave Page"

Date:

27 February 2006, 15:56:02


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:pgadmin@pse-consulting.de]
> Sent: 27 February 2006 16:47
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Peter Eisentraut; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] localpipe
>
> Dave Page wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> >>[mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of
> >>Peter Eisentraut
> >>Sent: 24 February 2006 09:45
> >>To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> >>Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] localpipe
> >>
> >>pgAdmin talks about a <localpipe>, but the thing is in fact a local
> >>socket, not a pipe.  I suggest the following change.
>
> Hm, easily mixed up with localhost, which uses a socket too. But we
> don't have the space for 'local unix socket' either.

'UDS'? Personally I think socket is better than localpipe though, even
granted that it's still potentially ambiguous.

Regards, Dave.

Re: localpipe

From

Peter Eisentraut

Date:

27 February 2006, 16:31:22

Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Hm, easily mixed up with localhost, which uses a socket too. But we
> don't have the space for 'local unix socket' either.

The official terms are such that sockets in the file system namespace
are AF_LOCAL (or AF_UNIX), and sockets in the Internet namespace are
AF_INET.  So using "local (domain) socket" or "Unix (domain) socket"
would be reasonable.  (Both are used by PostgreSQL.)  A pipe on the
other hand is created by the pipe() function and does not have a socket
or a namespace since it is internal to the creating process, which is
the distinguishing characteristic between a pipe and a socket.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/