From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Achilleas Mantzios <a(dot)mantzios(at)cloud(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: application_name backend (not) reporting back to the client : pgbouncer, PgSQL 16.1, pgbouncer 1.21.0 |
Date: | 2023-12-09 22:08:53 |
Message-ID: | 1750352.1702159733@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Achilleas Mantzios <a(dot)mantzios(at)cloud(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> writes:
> Hi again, I am puzzled with your observations, this is what I get with
> psql straight against PostgreSQL no pgbouncer involved :
> command :
> psql "postgresql://amantzio(at)localhost:5432/dynacom?application_name="
> ...
> public.S....is_superuser.on.S....application_name..S...&default_transaction_read_only.off.S....scram_iterations.4096.S....DateStyle.ISO,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I see the report of application_name with an empty-string value right
there.
> the client does not send the application_name
I do not know what you mean by that, but maybe your client code has
some special-case behavior for an empty string?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Achilleas Mantzios | 2023-12-10 05:41:43 | Re: application_name backend (not) reporting back to the client : pgbouncer, PgSQL 16.1, pgbouncer 1.21.0 |
Previous Message | Achilleas Mantzios | 2023-12-09 21:38:39 | Re: application_name backend (not) reporting back to the client : pgbouncer, PgSQL 16.1, pgbouncer 1.21.0 |