Re: Application name patch - v2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Harald Armin Massa <chef(at)ghum(dot)de>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Application name patch - v2
Date: 2009-10-21 15:25:48
Message-ID: 28467.1256138748@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, I would prefer PGAPPNAME to PGAPPLICATIONNAME which is what

> We don't usually use abbreviations, so how about PGCLIENTNAME or some such?

Not sure I believe that argument. Among the set of existing libpq
environment variables I see

PGHOSTADDR
PGSSLCERT
PGSSLCRL
PGKRBSRVNAME
PGTZ
PGSYSCONFDIR

so it can hardly be said that there's a policy of avoiding
abbreviations. PGCLIENTNAME would be better than PGAPPLICATIONNAME
I guess, but I still prefer the other.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2009-10-21 15:29:29 Re: Application name patch - v2
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-10-21 15:14:21 Re: Application name patch - v2