Re: selective statement logging

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > If people are happy with suppressing statement logging on a parse error,
> > OK.
>
> I think that's a really, really awful idea. Not infrequently, the
> postmaster log is the easiest way of debugging applications that are
> sending bogus SQL. If you fail to log the bogus SQL then you've just
> cut debuggers off at the knees.
>
> I haven't read the earlier part of the thread yet so I don't know just
> what problem you want to solve, but please not this solution.

The issue is allowing only logging of DDL statements, or DDL and data
modification statements, as listed on the TODO list. If they ask for
all statements, certainly we should log all statements.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073