Hi Euler,
> On 01. Mar, 2021, at 15:42, Euler Taveira <eu...@eulerto.com> wrote:
>
> We try to limit it to 80 characters but it is not a hard limit. Long
> descriptions should certainly be split into multiple lines.
got that, thanks.
> The question is: how popular is service and connection URIs?
well, we use them exclusively at work, because we have a lot of Patroni
clusters which may fail/switch over and we don't have an haproxy or similar. So
our usual way to connect is a URI with targetServerType set.
> We cannot certainly include all possibilities in the --help that's why we
> have the documentation. IMO we could probably include "connection string"
> that accepts 2 formats: (i) multiple keyword - value string and URIs
> ("service" is included in the (i)).
>
> Usage:
> psql [OPTION]... [DBNAME [USERNAME]|CONNINFO]
>
> Usage:
> psql [OPTION]... [DBNAME [USERNAME]]
> psql [OPTION]... [CONNINFO]
>
> Connection options:
> CONNINFO connection string to connect to (key = value
> strings
> or connection URI)
I could live with the second variant, though I'd still prefer two descriptions,
one "service=name" and the second for the URI, as I initially suggested.
> It might be a different topic but since we are talking about --help
> improvements, I have some suggestions:
>
> * an Example section could help newbies to Postgres command-line tools to
> figure out how to inform the connection parameters. In this case, we could
> include at least 3 examples: (i) -h, -p, -U parameters, (ii) key/value
> connection string and (iii) connection URI.
there's an example in the USAGE/Connecting to a Database section of the man
page already. Also, it is documented how an URI works, so I wouldn't include an
example here. Just reflecting its existence in the syntax should do. Same goes
for service names.
> * Connection options could be moved to the top (maybe after General options)
> if we consider that it is more important than the other sections (you cannot
> probably execute psql without using a connection parameter in production).
moving it up is IMHO merely a matter of personal taste. Making sure it's there
was my initial point.
But as Mark pointed out, there's too much linked to it for me (man pages, docs,
etc.). So I drop the proposal altogether. Thanks for you thoughts anyway.
Now we at least have this topic finally in the mail archives. ;-)
P.S.: Just curious, why do you right-pad your posts?
Cheers,
Paul
