On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 17:29, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Since we now show the application name in pg_stat_replication, I think
>> it would make sense to have the walreceiver set
>> fallback_application_name on the connection string, like so:
>
> Seems reasonable, but "postgres" is a mighty poor choice of name
> for that, no?  I don't have any really great substitute suggestion
> --- best I can do offhand is "walreceiver" --- but "postgres" seems
> uselessly generic, not to mention potentially confusing compared
> to the default superuser name for instance.

I agree it's not a great name.

Is "walreceiver" something that "the average DBA" is going to realize
what it is? Perhaps go for something like "replication slave"?

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

• Re: walreceiver fallback_application_name at 2011-01-16 16:29:24 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: walreceiver fallback_application_name at 2011-01-16 20:53:47 from Dimitri Fontaine

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2011-01-16 17:18:47
	Subject: Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups
Previous:	From: Simon Riggs	Date: 2011-01-16 17:18:22
	Subject: Re: We need to log aborted autovacuums