From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: log_filename_prefix --> log_filename + strftime() |
Date: | 2004-08-31 08:55:26 |
Message-ID: | 41343CFE.4040509@pse-consulting.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
>
>>I don't have the time now to review the impact, but this might make
>>interpreting the log filename difficult or impossible, effectively
>>corrupting pg_logdir_ls.
>
>
> So if you want to use that, you use a format that it can cope with.
"you" is the backend, which should be able to interpret what it wrote.
> I don't see a problem.
Yes, you don't see a problem if the logfile can't be displayed on the
client, I know that. My primary intention for contributing *any* logfile
related stuff was to make it available through admin interfaces, and
this goal seems to get obstructed in any possible way.
Anybody volunteering to fix the pg_logdir_ls code at
http://cvs.pgadmin.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/pgadmin-tools/support/misc.c?rev=HEAD
which should have been in the backend right from the start?
What about misbehaving size rotation if the filename isn't unique? And
what's a non human readable name.epoch pattern default good for?
Regards,
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shinji Teragaito | 2004-08-31 11:00:14 | Re: [PATCHES] HP-UX PA-RISC/Itanium 64-bit Patch and HP-UX 11.23 Patch |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-08-31 05:19:36 | Re: log_filename_prefix --> log_filename + strftime() |