Re: Application name patch - v4

On Tuesday 01 December 2009 09:59:17 Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > Actually I think the poolers make a good case for a SET variant which
> > emulates connection set variables...
> >
> > RESET ALL in a connection pooler does different things than RESET ALL
> > outside of one.
>
> Eh? Not sure I follow that, but then I haven't had a coffee yet.
Well. RESET ALL in a pooler sets values to the initial connection values the
pooler had, not the ones of pooled connection.

On the same time there are multiple people complaining about such default
values being contraproductive to pooling environments because they reset to
the wrong values.
I dont really get that argument - the pooler should just issue a SET
CONNECTION DEFAULT for all connection values. That would make it far more
transparent than before...

> Upthread, Tom suggested a new 'SET DEFAULT ...' variant of SET which
> could be used to set the default GUC value that RESET would revert to.
> This seems to me to be the ideal solution, and I'd somewhat hesitantly
> volunteer to work on it (hesitantly as it means touching the parser
> and other areas of the code I currently have no experience of).
As I had initially suggested something like that I agree here.

Andres