Re: Cluster name in ps output

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > Including the value of listen_addresses along w/ the port would make it
> > useful. If we really don't want the cluster-name concept (which,
> > personally, I like quite a bit), how about including the listen_address
> > value if it isn't '*'?
>
> Nah, let's do cluster name. That way, somebody who's only got one
> postmaster isn't suddenly going to see a lot of useless clutter,
> ie the user gets to decide what to add to ps output. "SHOW cluster_name"
> might be useful at the application level as well, I suspect.

Ah, yes, agreed, that could be quite useful.

> I still think the brackets are unnecessary though.

Either way is fine for me on this.

> Also, -1 for adding another log_line_prefix escape. If you're routing
> multiple clusters logging to the same place (which is already a bit
> unlikely IMO), you can put distinguishing strings in log_line_prefix
> already. And it's not like we've got an infinite supply of letters
> for those escapes.

Agreed.

Thanks,

Stephen