|From:||Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>|
|To:||Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Mon, 2015-09-07 at 18:28 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I noticed %t, but I don't think we care since the precision is so poor.
> Making m and n work in unison seems enough. I think it would be
> reasonably simple to handle %t in the same way, but I'm not sure we
> I think the extra ugliness is warranted, since it's not THAT much
> additional ugliness, and not doing it could be considered a regression;
> apparently strftime can be slower even than snprintf, so doing it twice
> per log message might be excessive overhead.
Patch attached. Please take a quick look.
|Next Message||Alvaro Herrera||2015-09-07 22:06:16||Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix|
|Previous Message||Alexander Korotkov||2015-09-07 22:00:01||Re: WIP: Rework access method interface|