From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | depesz <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
Date: | 2007-12-06 18:08:43 |
Message-ID: | 47583AAB.6060102@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "depesz" <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Description: csvlog skips some logs
>>
>
> The point here is that CSV-format log output doesn't include the
> DETAIL, HINT, or context (QUERY/STATEMENT/CONTEXT) lines that
> you might get with normal output.
>
> I suppose this was intentional in order to keep the CSV output
> format manageable, but I have to wonder whether it's really a
> good idea. I can see the argument that you probably don't need
> to log HINTs, but the other stuff might be important. Particularly
> the STATEMENT.
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
I don't recall making such a conscious intention - not sure about others
whose fingers have been in the pie. More likely it's just oversight. In
general, I'd say that the log content should be independent of the
format. I can't see any very good reason for text logs to have different
content from CSV logs.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-06 18:18:51 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-12-06 18:04:01 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-06 18:18:51 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-06 18:07:32 | Re: pg_dump and BINARY mode COPY |