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