From: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Massimo Dal Zotto <dz(at)cs(dot)unitn(dot)it>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Syslog and pg_options (for RPMs) |
Date: | 2001-02-08 19:17:26 |
Message-ID: | 3A82F0C6.CC884790@wgcr.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Can someone address this?
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > Seems this was already done in 7.1, right?
> > [thread on puts() and fprintf(stderr and printf instead of tprintf or
> > replacement truncated]
> >
> > There are still scads of fprintf(stderr, "some error message from
> > postmaster or backend") lying around, in CURRENT as of this morning at
> > 1:00AM EDT. Some are things such as the usage message -- others are
> > obviously (IMHO) things that need to be sent to the logs. We're not
> > replacing the system fprintf , are we? (my assumption is that we are
> > NOT). The usage of puts(), OTOH, has been well nigh eradicated.
Where is elog() safe? (Going to Bruce 'comb through the archives' mode
here...)
If someone can educate me in that, I can tackle doing this. Don't know
if I can do so before 7.1 release, but I'll certainly try.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-02-08 19:37:16 | Re: PL/pgsql EXECUTE 'SELECT INTO ...' |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-02-08 16:45:38 | pg_ctl default shutdown mode |