[Bug]: JDBC host-less URI (///) are not parsed correctly

[carlo-colombo]

Module

Core

Testcontainers version

1.19.5

Using the latest Testcontainers version?

Yes

Host OS

OsX

Host Arch

ARM

Docker version

Client: Docker Engine - Community
 Version:           25.0.1
 API version:       1.43 (downgraded from 1.44)
 Go version:        go1.21.6
 Git commit:        29cf629222
 Built:             Tue Jan 23 15:11:10 2024
 OS/Arch:           darwin/arm64
 Context:           default

Server: Docker Engine - Community
 Engine:
  Version:          24.0.7
  API version:      1.43 (minimum version 1.12)
  Go version:       go1.20.10
  Git commit:       311b9ff
  Built:            Thu Oct 26 09:07:58 2023
  OS/Arch:          linux/amd64
  Experimental:     false
 containerd:
  Version:          1.6.25
  GitCommit:        d8f198a4ed8892c764191ef7b3b06d8a2eeb5c7f
 runc:
  Version:          1.1.10
  GitCommit:        v1.1.10-0-g18a0cb0
 docker-init:
  Version:          0.19.0
  GitCommit:        de40ad0

What happened?

When using a host-less jdbc string as jdbc:tc:mysql:8.0.36:///my_database?useConfigs=maxPerformance&characterEncoding=utf8&useSSL=false as suggested in the examples [1], the database name is not correctly extracted and it defaults to test. Adding any random host:port allows the database name to be extracted correctly (e.g. jdbc:tc:mysql:8.0.36://foobar:42424242/my_database )

The regex that extracts the database name does not support host-less jdbc urls "([^:]+)(:([0-9]+))?/([^\\\\?]+) as it tries to extract it from the dbHostString field that in case of a host-less jdbc string is /database_name.

[1] https://java.testcontainers.org/modules/databases/jdbc/#:~:text=We%20will%20use%20///%20(host%2Dless%20URIs)%20from%20now%20on%20to%20emphasis%20the%20unimportance%20of%20the%20host%3Aport%20pair.%0AFrom%20Testcontainers%27%20perspective%2C%20jdbc%3Amysql%3A8.0.36%3A//localhost%3A3306/databasename%20and%20jdbc%3Amysql%3A8.0.36%3A///databasename%20is%20the%20same%20URI.

Relevant log output

No response

Additional Information

https://regex101.com/r/na4SoN/1 (check test cases)

[rcunn87]

I just discovered this myself