[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-hackers
Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Application name patch - v4
From:       Bruce Momjian <bruce () momjian ! us>
Date:       2009-11-30 23:59:09
Message-ID: 200911302359.nAUNx9H02437 () momjian ! us
[Download RAW message or body]

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
> <dfontaine@hi-media.com> wrote:
> > Le 30 nov. 2009 ? 22:38, Robert Haas a ?crit :
> > > I still don't really understand why we wouldn't want RESET ALL to
> > > reset the application name. ?In what circumstances would you want the
> > > application name to stay the same across a RESET ALL?
> > 
> > I can't see any use case, but SET/RESET is tied to SESSION whereas \
> > application_name is a CONNECTION property. So it's a hard sell that reseting the \
> > session will change connection properties.
> 
> Is there any technical difference between a connection property and a
> session property?  If so, what is it?
> 
> ISTM that the only time you're likely going to use RESET ALL is in a
> connection pooling environment, and that if you're in a connection
> pooling environment you probably want to reset the application name
> along with everything else.  I might be wrong, but that's how it seems
> to me at first blush.

Uh, what does it mean to reset the application name?  Are you resetting
it to what it was before the session started, or to a blank string?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]