| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Client application name |
| Date: | 2009-10-21 14:49:09 |
| Message-ID: | 27924.1256136549@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> Should we perhaps change the behaviour of the backend to give a
> warning only for unknown settings in the startup packet?
It's not going to help, unless you first invent a time machine so
we can retroactively cause all PG servers that are already in the field
to behave that way.
> It doesn't
> seem beyond the realms of possibility that we might want to add
> something else in the future, and this will at least mean that in a
> few releases time it might be reasonably safe to do so.
This might be a good argument for changing that going forward, but
it will be *years* before we can rely on it for anything.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-21 14:54:17 | Re: \du quite ugly in 8.4 |
| Previous Message | u235sentinel | 2009-10-21 14:35:55 | Re: postgres 8.3.8 and Solaris 10_x86 64 bit problems? |