Re: Application name patch - v4

From: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Application name patch - v4
Date: 2009-11-30 21:54:54
Message-ID: 31A521F5-FF0C-4FB1-923F-A6A0CEDDD4EF@hi-media.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Le 30 nov. 2009 à 22:38, Robert Haas a écrit :
> I still don't really understand why we wouldn't want RESET ALL to
> reset the application name. In what circumstances would you want the
> application name to stay the same across a RESET ALL?

I can't see any use case, but SET/RESET is tied to SESSION whereas application_name is a CONNECTION property. So it's a hard sell that reseting the session will change connection properties.

Regards,
--
dim

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-11-30 22:06:12 Re: Application name patch - v4
Previous Message Aidan Van Dyk 2009-11-30 21:49:14 Re: Block-level CRC checks