Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: reindexdb command utlility

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Henrik Zagerholm <henke(at)mac(dot)se>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: reindexdb command utlility
Date: 2006-06-07 17:02:08
Message-ID: 200606071702.k57H28l06437@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Patch applied.  Thanks.
> 
> Why is this an improvement?  AFAIR an INFO message is *not suppressible*
> by adjusting client_min_messages, therefore this makes the system more
> chatty not less so.  It certainly doesn't do anything to address the
> original complaint.

I thought it needed changing for consistency.  Shouldn't status messages
like this be INFO:

	test=> REINDEX DATABASE test;
	NOTICE:  table "pg_class" was reindexed
	NOTICE:  table "sql_languages" was reindexed
	NOTICE:  table "sql_packages" was reindexed
	NOTICE:  table "sql_parts" was reindexed

If I do VACUUM VERBOSE, those messages are INFO.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   http://candle.pha.pa.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-06-07 17:17:01
Subject: Re: reindexdb command utlility
Previous:From: Alexis GabadinhoDate: 2006-06-07 16:03:52
Subject: Pltcl can't install on windows

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group