| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Chris Campbell" <chris(at)bignerdranch(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump? |
| Date: | 2007-02-26 19:11:23 |
| Message-ID: | 4826.1172517083@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Yeh, LOG would be most appropriate, but thats not possible.
You have not given any good reason for that.
> log_min_messages allows only DEBUG5, DEBUG4, DEBUG3, DEBUG2, DEBUG1,
> INFO, NOTICE and WARNING for non-error states.
I don't think you understand quite how the log message priority works...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-02-26 19:19:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-02-26 19:01:24 | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-02-26 19:19:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump? |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-02-26 19:01:24 | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock with pg_dump? |