Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" log message
От | Don Seiler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" log message |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHJZqBAaE8soR05Rqoa+OT6dqu5ejQqr7Kk1EqFrZZBeNBVNKQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" log message (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" logmessage
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:32 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Don Seiler <don@seiler.us> writes:
> 1. We want to make a generic, central ascii-lobotomizing function similar
> to check_application_name that we can re-use there and for other checks (eg
> user name).
> 2. Change check_application_name to call this function (or just call this
> function instead of check_application_name()?)
check_application_name's API is dictated by the GUC check-hook interface,
and doesn't really make sense for this other use. So the first part of
that, not the second.
> 3. Call this function when storing the value in the port struct.
I'm not sure where exactly is the most sensible place to call it,
but trying to minimize the number of places that know about this
kluge seems like a good principle.
I've been fighting my own confusion with git and rebasing and fighting the same conflicts over and over and over, but this patch should be what I want. If anyone has time to review my git process, I would appreciate it. I must be doing something wrong to have these same conflicts every time I rebase (or I completely misunderstand what it actually does).
Thanks,
Don.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: