Re: Client application name

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> 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.

That's what I meant by 'a few releases' (major, not minor).

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PGDay.EU 2009 Conference: http://2009.pgday.eu/start