I see. Then it should not be included in postgresql.conf, since that makes no sense for setting it.
@Chris, it is in the docs, see the following PG-9.2 manual page: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.2/interactive/runtime-config-logging.html#GUC-APPLICATION-NAME T On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Tianyin Xu <t...@cs.ucsd.edu> wrote: > >> I still wonder why application_name appears in the configuration file > if it > >> cannot take effort :-P > > > Not sure what you mean by that, but my postgresql.conf doesn't have > > anything about application_name. But if it did, it would be a default > > that an application can override. > > The reason background processes don't print anything for %a is that it's > presumed it couldn't possibly be set to anything meaningful. While in > principle you can set it in the configuration file as a default for > uninformed clients, it's not clear there's a good reason to do that. > Even if you think that's a good idea, we'd still not want background > processes to print it, because then you couldn't tell the difference > between log entries from background processes and those from uninformed > clients. > > regards, tom lane > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general > -- Tianyin XU, http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~tixu/
