Re: puzzled by the docs

From: "Karl F(dot) Larsen" <k5di(at)zianet(dot)com>
To: Hernan Gonzalez <hgonzal(at)sinectis(dot)com(dot)ar>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: puzzled by the docs
Date: 2000-06-27 16:47:14
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.10.10006271043430.1162-100000@cannac.ampr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


I suggest you not worry too much about versions when using the
on-line docs. The doc's are ALWAYS for an earlier version. But they work
fine on a later version. Nothing much has changed from SQL92 which is 8
years old now.

If you learn to write good code with SQL92 it will run fine on
postgres AND other database.

On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, Hernan Gonzalez wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Hernan Gonzalez <hgonzal(at)sinectis(dot)com(dot)ar> writes:
> > > The PostgreSQL Administrator's Guide which appears on the web
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/admin/index.html
> > > is fairly different from the one which is packed with
> > > the 7.0.2 distribution.
> >
> > > Which is the good one?
> >
> > The files appearing under http://www.postgresql.org/docs/ are a
> > snapshot of current development, not the docs that go with the
> > most recent release. Any changes you see are work that will be
> > in the next major release (ie, 7.1).
> >
> > We have been planning to rearrange the website so that the main
> > docs page shows the most recent release, and the development
> > snapshot appears someplace else, but I guess Vince hasn't got
> > round to it yet ...
> >
> > regards, tom lane
>
> Ok.
> It would be nice, I think, if the docs specify (in the heading)
> to which version they correspond...
>
> Anyway, the 7.0.2 docs state (in the "pg_options" section)
> that :
>
> > Message printed to stdout or stderr are prefixed by a timestamp containing also the backend pid
> >
> > #timestamp #pid #message
> > 980127.17:52:14.173 [29271] StartTransactionCommand
> > 980127.17:52:14.174 [29271] ProcessUtility: dro
> > ...
> > This format improves readability of the logs and allows people to understand exactly which backend is
> > doing what and at which time. It also makes easier to write simple awk or perl scripts which monitor the
> > log to detect database errors or problem, or to compute transaction time statistics.
>
> It is very true that this format is useful, but that's not what I get.
> My 7.0.2 postmaster is started with stdout & stderr redirected to a file,
> and I get no timestamps no pids.
>
> My .../data/pg_options file contains two lines:
>
> verbose=1
> query
>
> Am I doing something wrong ?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Hernan Gonzalez
> Buenos Aires, Argentina
>
>

Yours Truly,

- Karl F. Larsen, k5di(at)arrl(dot)net (505) 524-3303 -

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Knut Aksel Rysland 2000-06-27 17:56:29 Non-blocking LOCK
Previous Message Hernan Gonzalez 2000-06-27 16:37:55 Re: puzzled by the docs