On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
> Le 30 nov. 2009 à 22:38, Robert Haas a écrit :
>> I still don't really understand why we wouldn't want RESET ALL to
>> reset the application name. In what circumstances would you want the
>> application name to stay the same across a RESET ALL?
> I can't see any use case, but SET/RESET is tied to SESSION whereas application_name is a CONNECTION property. So it's a hard sell that reseting the session will change connection properties.
Is there any technical difference between a connection property and a
session property? If so, what is it?
ISTM that the only time you're likely going to use RESET ALL is in a
connection pooling environment, and that if you're in a connection
pooling environment you probably want to reset the application name
along with everything else. I might be wrong, but that's how it seems
to me at first blush.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: 张中||Date: 2009-11-30 23:10:25|
|Subject: 答复: [HACKERS] is isolation level 'Serializable' in pg not same as 'serializable' in SQL-92?|
|Previous:||From: Dimitri Fontaine||Date: 2009-11-30 21:54:54|
|Subject: Re: Application name patch - v4|