| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jelte Fennema <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: psql: show current user in prompt |
| Date: | 2023-09-12 07:46:31 |
| Message-ID: | 0a6f5e6b-65b3-4272-260d-a17ce8f5b3a4@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11.09.23 13:59, Jelte Fennema wrote:
> @Tom and @Robert, since you originally suggested extending the
> protocol for this, I think some input from you on the protocol design
> would be quite helpful. BTW, this protocol extension is the main
> reason I personally care for this patch, because it would allow
> PgBouncer to ask for updates on certain GUCs so that it can preserve
> session level SET commands even in transaction pooling mode.
> Right now PgBouncer can only do this for a handful of GUCs, but
> there's quite a few others that are useful for PgBouncer to preserve
> by default:
> - search_path
> - statement_timeout
> - lock_timeout
ISTM that for a purpose like pgbouncer, it would be simpler to add a new
GUC "report these variables" and send that in the startup message? That
might not help with the psql use case, but it would be much simpler.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-09-12 07:52:50 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-09-12 07:33:54 | Re: Adding a pg_get_owned_sequence function? |