RE: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation

Dear Ashutosh,

Thanks for the reply.

> > ISTM the inconsistency is introduced since the initial commit. I think they should
> be unified either
> > 1) update the doc or 2) accept when -d is not specified. Personally, I like 2nd
> approach, pg_recvlogical
> > can follow the normal connection rule. I.e.,
> >
> 
> Given that the discrepancy has survived so long, it seems that users
> always pass -d. And to some extent, requiring users to specify a
> database instead of defaulting to one is safer practice. This avoids
> users fetching changes from unexpected database/slot and cause further
> database inconsistencies on the receiver side. I would just fix
> documentation in this case.

Something like attached, right? The fact that everyone has been set -d option
may be strong.

> > a) Use PGDATABASE if specified
> > b) Check 'U' and PGUSER and use it if specified
> > c) Otherwise use the current OS user name
> 
> If we want to go this route, it will be good to unify the treatment of
> -d option at one place in code and reuse it everywhere. Thanks to your
> investigations, we are seeing too many descripancies in -d option
> being used in many utilities. Fixing all at once would be good. Also
> it will be good to similarly unify documentation by writing -d
> documentation at only place and reusing it everywhere. But I don't
> know whether our documentation allows modularization and code-reuse.

Hmm, unify the treatment seems clean, but it may break current connection rules
for some application. I'm not sure now this is helpful for users.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED