On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Magnus Hagander <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Dave Page <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Magnus Hagander <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > The part that changed is just the one that added db1 and db2, right? >> >> It's the server display name *and* the database name, so to give a >> (redacted) example from my machine, I would have: >> >> aws-ap-southeast-1b.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.com (aws-ap-southeast-1b. >> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.com:5432):postgres >> >> Which as you can see is quite long. > > > I thought the point of display names was to have them nice and short :) I've > certainly never used displaynames that are that long.
I generally use the full hostnames (as I have machines in multiple domains) - and in the places that you currently see them, that length is actually fine. > Yes, I totally see with names like that it becomes annoying, and certainly > not easy to parse. Perhaps what we really shoul dhave is just displayname + > databasename, and exclude the actual hostname? That would be an improvement, certainly. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
