Re: Logging (was Re: Suggestion GRANT ALTER, TRIGGER ON

On Tue, 20 May 2003, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 02:42:21PM -0600, scott.marlowe wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 May 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > > Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > > > I would propose
> > > > SELECT
> > > > INSERT/UPDATE
> > > > DELETE
> > > > DDL
> > >
> > > Hm, why that particular division --- why separate DELETE but keep
> > > INSERT and UPDATE together?
> >
> > Why not just use a regex? Then you could log exactly what you're looking
> > for.
>
> I'd think a bitstring or some such is better... with a regex you are
> sure going to drive the performance down.

Sure, that's fine too. I'd just prefer some way to "wild card" what is
being logged. I.e. I can look for specific SQL code and log just that.

Logging all selects doesn't really gain me much over grepping the log
files, as there will still be tons of selects I'm not interested in on a
production system. Logging queries that contain specific keywords (i.e.
table name, field name things like that) represents a much more useful
tool to me.