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

Re: syslogger line-end processing infelicity

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: syslogger line-end processing infelicity
Date: 2007-06-02 01:11:54
Message-ID: 4660C3DA.5070202@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> The other little problem (which is the reason we like the stderr
> approach in the first place) is that not all the stderr output we want
> to capture comes from code under our control.  This may not be a huge
> problem in production situations, since the main issue in my experience
> is being able to capture dynamic-linker messages when shlib loading fails.
> But it is a stumbling block in the way of any proposals that involve
> having a more structured protocol for the stuff going down the wire :-(
>
>
>   

I don't think that need worry us about CSV output - AFAICS it's 
redirected quite separately from stderr - more like syslog really, so 
the CSV output *is* all from code under our control.

I'm pondering some very simple method of signalling the end of a CSV 
line, like appending a null byte (which we would of course strip out, so 
it would never appear on the file), and only allowing a CSV log rotation 
if we are on a boundary.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-06-02 02:05:32
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] like/ilike improvements
Previous:From: Jim NasbyDate: 2007-06-02 00:13:54
Subject: Re: To all the pgsql developers..Have a look at the operators proposed by me in my research paper.

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