Re: elog() patch

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: elog() patch
Date: 2002-03-04 02:52:52
Message-ID: 200203040252.g242qq108185@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> writes:
> > EXPLAIN would come out as INFO would it not?
>
> If we make it INFO it won't come out at all, at the message level that
> a lot of more-advanced users will prefer to use. That's no solution.

Well, right now it is INFO. It is certainly not a notice/warning or
error. Seems we will have to address this. Let me look at the existing
INFO message and see if there are any others that _have_ to be emitted.
I will add a new symbol INFOFORCE which will always be sent to the
client no matter what the client_min_messages level. Seems this is the
only good way to fix this. Even if we make that NOTICE/WARNING, people
may turn that off too.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-03-04 03:22:22 Re: elog() patch
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-03-04 02:49:07 Re: elog() patch