Re: session IDs

--On Tuesday, February 03, 2004 11:12:03 -0500 Andrew Dunstan
<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:

>
>
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
>> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am less sure of the utility of such an ID, though. After all, if
>>> you see a disconnect log message for a given PID you must know that
>>> any reuse of that PID indicates a new session, or even if you just
>>> see a connection message you know it must be a new session. OTOH,
>>> having a unique SessionID might simplify the logic required of log
>>> analysis tools.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The PID *is* a unique session ID. Why is it not sufficient?
>>
>
> It's unique for the duration of the session, but it won't be for logs
> covering a sufficient period of time, because PIDs are reused, in some
> cases not even by cycling but being allocated randomly.
>
> As I said elsewhere, I can live with that, but others wanted something
> that was more unique (if such a term has meaning ;-)
How about pid+unix time of start of backend?

LER

>
> cheers
>
> andrew ("You are unique. Just like everybody else.")
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749