Horton

Re: isolationtester: add session name to application name

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2021-12-13T10:46:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 05:20:52PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> These days isolationtester.c already prefixes log output with the session
> name. How about doing the same for application_name? It's a *tad* more
> complicated than I'd like because isolationtester.c currently doesn't know the
> name of the test its executing.

+1 for the idea.  Maybe it could be backpatched?  It could be really
useful to have the same amount of details across all the stable
branches to ease any future backpatch of a test.  It does not seem to
me that many people would rely much on application_name in out-of-core
test, but if that's the case such tests would suddenly break after a
the next minor upgrade.

> As attached this appends "control connection" for the control connection, but
> perhaps we should just not append anything for that?

Keeping "control connection" seems is fine for me for these.

> +		 * easier to map spec file sesions to log output and

One s/sesions/sessions/ here.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. isolationtester: append session name to application_name.

  2. backpatch "Set application_name per-test in isolation and ecpg tests."