Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)

From: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)
Date: 2001-05-05 09:14:48
Message-ID: 20010505021447.A18676@fw.wintelcom.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> [010505 02:06] wrote:
> There's a TODO item to make elog(LOG) a separate level. I propose the
> name INFO. It would be identical to DEBUG in effect, only with a
> different label. Additionally, all DEBUG logging should either be
> disabled unless the debug_level is greater than zero, or alternatively
> some elog(DEBUG) calls should be converted to INFO conditional on a
> configuration setting (like log_pid, for example).
>
> The stricter distinction between DEBUG and INFO would also yield the
> possibility of optionally sending DEBUG output to the frontend, as has
> been requested a few times.

INFO makes sense as afaik it maps to syslog.

--
-Alfred Perlstein - [alfred(at)freebsd(dot)org]
Daemon News Magazine in your snail-mail! http://magazine.daemonnews.org/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Bartunov 2001-05-05 11:00:19 Re: GiST indexing problems...
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-05-05 08:58:18 elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)