From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] WIP patch - INSERT-able log statements |
Date: | 2007-02-20 04:09:40 |
Message-ID: | 19464.1171944580@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Also, "sql" is not really a destination -- it is a format.
> A log file with a different name is another destination. eventlog is
> certainly a different format and it's sitting happily as an option there.
> I haven't heard anyone make a useful argument yet as to how insert/sql
> logs are any different than the current way that stderr, syslog, and
> eventlog are all possibilities now for log_destination, each with their
> own little quirks (and in the case of syslog, their own additional GUC
> parameters).
Since the "sql" format doesn't make any sense for syslog or eventlog
output, I tend to agree that treating it as a destination is a
reasonable answer. It's going to be a bit non-orthogonal no matter
which way we jump, but this seems like the most natural and useful
extension from where we are. To me anyway ... YMMV ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-20 04:11:44 | Re: WIP patch - INSERT-able log statements |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-02-20 03:59:38 | Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-02-20 04:11:44 | Re: WIP patch - INSERT-able log statements |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-02-20 03:49:27 | Re: pgsql: Fix for plpython functions; return true/false for boolean, |