On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> I had a request from a customer asking if we could make a switch to
>> specifically disable the "unexpected EOF" message that fills lots of
>> peoples logs. Along the same way that we have a flag to turn off the
>> "nonstandard use of string escapes" message that is another culprit
>> (that's actually a much *worse* problem than just the unexpected EOF).
>> The unexpected EOF message *does* indicate the client is doing
>> something stupid, but it's not like it's an *actual problem* in pretty
>> much every deployment out there...
>> Would we consider adding such a switch (it should be easy enough to
>> do), or do we want to push this off to the mythical "let's improve the
>> logging subsystem" project that might eventually materialize if we're
>> lucky? Meaning - would people object to such a switch?
> Yes, if the new parameter allows a generic filter on multiple
> user-specified message types.
Uh, just to be clear, you object *if* it has the generic filter?
Also, AFAIK we don't *have* a "message type" at this point (one of the
things said mythical project wanted to look at), so the only thing we
could really filter on would be the whole text of the message, no?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Vik Reykja||Date: 2012-05-03 12:34:01|
|Subject: Re: "unexpected EOF" messages|
|Previous:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2012-05-03 12:31:45|
|Subject: ALTER DATABASE and datallowconn|