Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql'not $USER

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G. Johnston
Тема Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql'not $USER
Дата
Msg-id CAKFQuwb2QgiMA=aWXpHkDmQSPWnO=mDJArX-UozddmQf8EoE+w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql'not $USER  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql'not $USER
Список pgsql-bugs
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 11/16/17 16:27, David G. Johnston wrote:
>        List all available databases, then exit. Other non-connection
> -      options are ignored. This is similar to the meta-command
> +      options are ignored. If an explicit database name is not
> +      found the <literal>postgres</literal> database, not the user's,
> +      will be targeted for connection. This is similar to the meta-command
>        <command>\list</command>.

What does "an explicit database name is not found" mean?

​A name was not supplied to the psql command either as the first non-option argument, via the --dbname command line option, in the connection URI (possibly indirectly via a pg_service.conf entry), or via the PGDATABASE environment variable.

How does one
find an explicit database name?

Given the answer above does this question still apply?

David J.

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql'not $USER
Следующее
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #15045: Partitioning not working as intended