Re: log_error_verbosity function display

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> >> > Jaime Casanova wrote:
> >> >> i like this with or without the (), but maybe we are breaking client
> >> >> apps if change that
> >>
> >> > Ah, so you like FUNCTION.
> >>
> >> You can NOT change the line tag without almost certainly breaking
> >> log-reading tools like pgfouine. ?Even changing the content of the line
> >> risks that, and for no visible gain.
> >>
> >> This seems like the worst form of bike-shedding to me. ?This log entry
> >> has been formatted this way since 7.4, and nobody has ever complained
> >> about it, until you suddenly decided it was a problem. ?Leave it be.
> >
> > I propose to add '()' because it is confusing without it. ?I don't think
> > many people are using the feature or we would have received suggestions
> > for improvmement. ?As you can see, once I posted about it, there were a
> > number of people who wanted improvements.
>
> I'm not sure if people affirmatively wanted improvements or if people
> were just discussing how to change it if a change was to be made. I
> don't think you can infer that lack of suggestions for improvement
> implies that no one is using it; it could equally well imply that
> everyone likes it the way it is. To be sure, I probably would have
> coded it a bit differently if I'd written the functionality
> originally, but I don't think it's horrible the way it is, and Tom is
> right that there is something to be said for consistency.

I have seen no other replies to this so I will not make any changes to
the output format.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +