You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The Client struct in this crate seems to aim to operate collections within a single database. Why not just parse the database in the URI to build the Client instead of using the database method of a ClientBuilder?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hmm I am not opposed, but does this add anything apart from hiding stuff away? We could do the same thing for auth too but IMO using the builder is cleaner. We could always update it so that you can pass a complete URL or use the builder.
What is the use case you are thinking of? Or is the issue, that with the current client design a new client is required for each database being interacted with? The library currently only addresses our use cases so I would not be surprised if it can be improved in areas.
Okay so we could just extend uri here so that we parse with url and if auth, path etc are set then we set them in the builder. We can then add a with_uri to the Client. Would that be sufficient?
A database name can be included in a mongo URI,
The
Client
struct in this crate seems to aim to operate collections within a single database. Why not just parse the database in the URI to build theClient
instead of using thedatabase
method of aClientBuilder
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: