Re: Application name patch - v2

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Harald Armin Massa <chef(at)ghum(dot)de>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Application name patch - v2
Date: 2009-10-21 15:29:35
Message-ID: 4ADF28DF.9040001@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, I would prefer PGAPPNAME to PGAPPLICATIONNAME which is what
>>>
>
>
>> We don't usually use abbreviations, so how about PGCLIENTNAME or some such?
>>
>
> Not sure I believe that argument. Among the set of existing libpq
> environment variables I see
>
> PGHOSTADDR
> PGSSLCERT
> PGSSLCRL
> PGKRBSRVNAME
> PGTZ
> PGSYSCONFDIR
>
> so it can hardly be said that there's a policy of avoiding
> abbreviations. PGCLIENTNAME would be better than PGAPPLICATIONNAME
> I guess, but I still prefer the other.
>
>
>

OK. I don't have strong feelings on the subject.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Samuel ROZE 2009-10-21 15:31:45 URL Managment - C Function help
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-10-21 15:29:29 Re: Application name patch - v2