| From: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: JDBC gripe list |
| Date: | 2011-03-31 08:13:27 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTike12bhEnGZ+5LR60EGKVBU_S=KTAX6HtUTwG2v@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On 31 March 2011 20:29, Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> wrote:
> From what i played a little bit with SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, SET ROLE,
> those did not seem to affect the actual user (%u) in logging in postgresql logs.
> The aim was to have one common pool with "unnamed" connections and assign them to a user
> after/on geting the connection.
> If that was possible, and if JDBC supported that, then this problem would be easily solved.
Not sure why %u isn't changing, but if it's mostly logging you are
worried about, have you tried "SET application_name" and %a as an
alternative way of getting the app-level user info into the logs?
Oliver
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2011-03-31 10:06:04 | Re: JDBC gripe list |
| Previous Message | Achilleas Mantzios | 2011-03-31 07:58:56 | Re: JDBC gripe list |