From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Rationalizing code-sharing among src/bin/ directories |
Date: | 2016-03-25 03:44:43 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRLgk4oBJdEkf5EOBAOFKvJ=OXOYLsKtPH73j3ygfuuNQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Preventing the use of elog in the frontend is something that has been
>> addressed multiple times with FRONTEND, so that's not likely going to
>> be an issue I think. Andres has mentioned as well having some elog
>> stuff available in frontend..
>
> I'm on board with doing something about that one, though. There are
> quite a lot of places that could be cleaned up.
Not sure if Andres is working on that for now or not, the main
discussion that I am foreseeing here is how we are going to map elevel
for the frontend (should FATAL, PANIC exit immediately, etc). I think
as well that some sort of callback system would be needed to allow
frontend clients to perform filtering of the log entries. Say
pg_rewind has a --debug mode, so this would map with DEBUG1 entries,
we'd need a way to control if those are issued or not depending on the
frontend call arguments...
Surely that's a cleanup patch 9.7 though, so there are a couple of
months ahead of us... And that's not the highest priority now.
Stability of 9.6 is first and just ahead.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-03-25 03:53:30 | Re: Combining Aggregates |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-03-25 03:27:36 | Re: Alter or rename enum value |