Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I don't think that we need to bump the protocol version. The real
>> alternative here would be that libpq sends a startup packet that
>> includes application_name, and if it gets an error back from that,
>> it starts over without the app name.
> I looked (briefly) at doing that when we first ran into this
> suggestion. As you pointed out at the time, it seemed like that would
> require some fairly ugly hackery in fe-connect.c
Perhaps, but at the time it wasn't apparent that issuing a separate SET
would create user-visible behavioral inconsistencies. Now that we've
realized that, I think we should reconsider.
If people are agreed that double connect is a better alternative
I'm willing to go look at how to make it happen.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2009-12-01 16:33:54|
|Subject: Re: Application name patch - v4|
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2009-12-01 16:26:36|
|Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [HACKERS] Fwd: psql+krb5|