From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Client application name |
Date: | 2009-10-21 09:49:57 |
Message-ID: | 937d27e10910210249i6f188d16u70c9cbc89e7d5a45@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Looking at the way we process the startup packet in
> ProcessStartupPacket, there's one dirty hack you could do. As the code
> stands, if you specify "options" key/value pair more than once, the
> latter value overrides the first one. If we change that in PG 8.5 so
> that the values are concatenated instead, you can put app name into the
> first "options" line, and other options (or an empty string) into the
> second. Pre-8.5 servers will silently ignore the first line.
Not sure I follow - are you suggesting I set the appname via the
backend command line options? Currently I just send the
"application_name" as an explicit key/value pair.
> Another idea is to do something similar to the 'prefer' SSL mode, or if
> the server doesn't support protocol version 3: Try with the GUC in
> startup packet first, and if that fails, retry without it.
>
> I'm not sure if I like either of those better than the extra SET
> command, but I thought I'd mention it.
The command line sure seems ugly if that's what you meant. Retrying
doesn't seem so bad, though it'll still litter server logs with
connection errors.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PGDay.EU 2009 Conference: http://2009.pgday.eu/start
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-10-21 09:57:45 | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2009-10-21 09:45:39 | Re: Client application name |