Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: JDBC gripe list

From: Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: JDBC gripe list
Date: 2011-03-31 10:06:04
Message-ID: in1jm9$sqa$ (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-jdbc
Achilleas Mantzios, 31.03.2011 09:58:
>> If you are on 9.0 and have control over the connection
>> initialization in the pool, then using 9.0's "application_name"
>> might be a solution to this.
>> If you can configure the pool to run
>> SET application_name = 'app_user_name'
>> when a connection is taken out of the pool, then this name can be
>> part of the log message in the PostgreSQL logfile.
> Yes, sure, thanx for sharing this. One could indeed do this by
> hacking/subclassing the relevant pool classes in the app server. But
> that would still be a work around. I dont know why SET application
> ='' is reflected in the log files, but SET ROLE is not. Is it
> intentional ? Anyways this question should be targeted to the backend
> guys rather than here.

The actual SET application_name is not logged directly, but you can change the log configuration to include the name that is set with that statement.



In response to


pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Achilleas MantziosDate: 2011-03-31 10:21:51
Subject: Re: JDBC gripe list
Previous:From: Oliver JowettDate: 2011-03-31 08:13:27
Subject: Re: JDBC gripe list

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group