On 31 March 2011 20:29, Achilleas Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> wrote:
> From what i played a little bit with SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, SET ROLE,
> those did not seem to affect the actual user (%u) in logging in postgresql logs.
> The aim was to have one common pool with "unnamed" connections and assign them to a user
> after/on geting the connection.
> If that was possible, and if JDBC supported that, then this problem would be easily solved.
Not sure why %u isn't changing, but if it's mostly logging you are
worried about, have you tried "SET application_name" and %a as an
alternative way of getting the app-level user info into the logs?
Oliver