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

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Mark Wood <mhwood(at)ameritech(dot)net>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #14912: Undocumented: 'psql -l' assumes database 'postgresql' not $USER
Date: 2018-02-03 16:05:41
Message-ID: f8049805-b9f7-f3e0-307d-2805f3e834d4@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On 2/2/18 17:05, David G. Johnston wrote:
> 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.

OK, clarified that a bit further. Actually, an environment variable
does not take any effect for this.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bob Gailer 2018-02-03 19:08:46 Re: BUG #15046: non-greedy ignored
Previous Message Mark Scheffer 2018-02-03 10:02:24 Re: BUG #15026: Deadlock using GIST index