| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Application name patch - v2 |
| Date: | 2009-10-19 14:38:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20091019143803.GG17756@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Pavel Stehule (pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> 2009/10/19 Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>:
> > Or are you saying that it should not be possible for the client to
> > change the value after connecting? That limits the usefulness with
> > connection pools.
>
> What I know, connections from connection pool without reset are shared
> by one application. But I am not against some possibility to change
> this value from application. I am against to possibility an change by
> normal user. When we allow it, then this value has not any wight,
> because any broken appliaction (via SQL injection) can change it.
Broken applications have much bigger problems than this. Predicating
what we would/should do on the assumption of an application that's
broken just doesn't make sense to me.
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-10-19 14:39:18 | Re: Application name patch - v2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-19 14:36:19 | Re: Application name patch - v2 |