On 2 Září 2011, 12:45, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:01, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> wrote:
>> What about logging it with a lower level, e.g. NOTICE instead of the
>> current LOG? If that's not a solution then a new GUC is needed I guess.
> I guess if it's at a DEBUG level it won't annoy anybody who doesn't
> need it. Not sure if NOTICE is low enough..
I've changed the level to NOTICE. I guess I could put that to info, but
the debug levels seem too low to me. Is there a rule of a thumb about
where to put messages?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2011-09-02 13:44:42|
|Subject: Re: PATCH: regular logging of checkpoint progress|
|Previous:||From: PostgreSQL - Hans-Jürgen Schönig||Date: 2011-09-02 13:17:10|
|Subject: Re: help with plug-in function for additional (partition/shard) visibility checks|