| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| 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 15:29:35 |
| Message-ID: | 4ADF28DF.9040001@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>
OK. I don't have strong feelings on the subject.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Samuel ROZE | 2009-10-21 15:31:45 | URL Managment - C Function help |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-10-21 15:29:29 | Re: Application name patch - v2 |