From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Set log_line_prefix and application name in test drivers |
Date: | 2016-09-29 14:18:20 |
Message-ID: | 20160929141820.ks7ykduo7gtrzofz@msg.df7cb.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Tom Lane 2016-09-29 <16946(dot)1475157978(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > As long as we get %t and %p in there we're going to be way ahead, really.
>
> Could we get consensus on just changing the default to
>
> log_line_prefix = '%t [%p] '
>
> and leaving the rest out of it? I think pretty much everybody agrees
> that those fields are useful, whereas the rest of it is a lot more
> context-dependent. (For example, there are a whole lot of real
> installations where neither %u nor %d would be worth the log space.)
Nod. In many installations %u and %d will be effectively constants.
> Personally I'm also on board with using this for regression testing:
>
> log_line_prefix = '%t [%p] %q%a '
>
> but I doubt it can be sold as a general-purpose default.
I don't think it makes much sense to log only %a unconditionally,
except maybe for making more applications actually set it.
If we were to add more fields I'd go for
log_line_prefix = '%t [%p] %q%u(at)%d/%a '
but the above-proposed '%t [%p] ' is already fixing 95% of the problem
(and the remaining 5% are unclear).
Possibly the longer version could be added as an example in the
documentation.
So, in short, +1.
Christoph
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-29 14:30:25 | Re: Bug in to_timestamp(). |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2016-09-29 14:14:44 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |