Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > gabrielle wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >>> Shouldn't it just say "all means all", if we think that needs to be
> >>> explained?
> >> I think it should say something about the "all" option. I read &
> >> re-read that section trying to figure out what the difference between
> >> "mod" and "all" was, and finally asked on the irc channel. As it
> >> stands, it essentially says "there are three options to this command,
> >> but we're only going to tell you about two of them." :)
> > Well, if you take a look at utility.c:GetCommandLogLevel() you will see
> > that ALL includes a lot more commands than just SELECT.
> Yeah. My objection was not to documenting ALL, it was to documenting it
> with exactly that sentence, which seems both needlessly complicated and
> subject to errors of omission.
I have applied the following patch with adds "off" and "all statements"
identifiers. This is probaby the right level of detail for this.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Description: text/x-diff (1.3 KB)
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: gabrielle||Date: 2010-02-25 19:27:37|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] log_statement docs|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-02-25 19:07:57|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] log_statement docs |