From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix |
Date: | 2015-08-23 15:27:18 |
Message-ID: | 55D9E656.7030701@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/23/2015 09:28 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>>>> 1) fix the docs (explicitly say that it's a Unix epoch)
>>>
>>> I would add the word "numeric" in front of timestamp both in the doc and
>>> in the postgresql.conf.sample, as it justifies the chosen %n.
>>
>> I think we're already using 'unix epoch' in the docs without
>> explicitly stating that it's a numeric value, so I don't think we
>> should use it here as it'd be inconsistent.
>
> The point was to justify the choice of 'n' somehow.
>
>>>> 2) handle 'padding' properly
>>
>> Hmmm, I'm not entirely sure how exactly the padding is supposed to
>> work (IIRC I've never used it), and I thought it behaved correctly.
>> But maybe not - I think the safest thing is copy what 't' does, so
>> I've done that in attached v3 of the patch.
>
> Ok. Version 3 applies and compiles, and padding now works as expected.
>
> Here is a v4 that I also tested, and where I just removed a spurious '.'
> in the millisecond format.
Thanks for spotting that.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-08-23 15:27:21 | Re: PostgreSQL for VAX on NetBSD/OpenBSD |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2015-08-23 13:47:48 | Re: pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug? |