Re: Why psql connection assumes default database name as the username

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> I had the question specific to above two cases, when the database name is
> not provided. There is no surety of having a database name same as the user
> name. Then why assume the database name and try to connect to it. Is it due
> to legacy reason or due to some common database naming practice?
>

I have never named a database after a person/user ...​ myself or otherwise.

I suspect in the early days the user running psql was typically
"postgres". Since the database "postgres" is created by default if the
postgres O/S user runs psql without any arguments it will connect to
existing "postgres" database.

> > In my specific case the problem is just that the database 'pgadmin' is
>> not
>> > there, then why should it be a FATAL error. I understand that any
>> process
>> > aborting errors are treated FATAL. But it looks like a simple error
>> here.
>>
>> Levels or errors are clearly defined:
>> 1. ERROR means that something was wrong, but you can still continue to
>> work in the db connection
>> 2. FATAL means that something wrong happened, and you can't use the
>> connection any more as it has closed.
>>
>> Since failing to open db connection prohibits you from doing any more
>> work in the db connection (which is not there) - it's clearly FATAL and
>> not ERROR.
>
>
> In this case the database does not exist, then connecting to a non
> existent database does not seem a FATAL issue.
>

If psql had some concept of "working but disconnected" I might agree with
this sentiment but since its either connected or not running​ not finding
the database its looking for means it has "stop running" which means it is
dead (i.e., FATAL)

David J.