Re: Application name patch - v3

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Application name patch - v3
Date: 2009-12-28 16:06:52
Message-ID: 11186.1262016412@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> writes:
> Le 28/12/2009 10:07, Dave Page a crit :
>> Yes, still waiting on the new API.

> Is there something I can do to make this move forward?

I think we were stalled on the question of whether to use one array
or two parallel arrays. Do you want to try coding up a sample usage
of each possibility so we can see which one seems more useful?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-12-28 16:08:19 Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-28 15:58:30 Re: Removing pg_migrator limitations