Re: Client application name
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Client application name |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2070.1256150491@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Client application name (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Client application name
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The post-connect SET still seems like the best choice to me. > Are we really thinking about interposing an additional server > round-trip on every connection for such a marginal feature (to > paraphrase yourself)? That doesn't seem like a good trade-off. Only connections that are actually using the feature. It doesn't bother me that much --- before 7.4 we had *multiple* round trips involved in a connection start, and anyway backend startup is a pretty dang heavyweight operation. If you are concerned about that you should certainly not be advocating multiple connection tries instead. That's a lot of round trips too, plus you are paying repeated fork and backend-startup overhead. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: