| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, depesz <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
| Date: | 2007-12-11 13:46:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20071211134616.GA7172@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Hmm, I'm now wondering if the log line number is correctly positioned.
Right now we have it just after the PID. So it suggests that following
PID and log line number is enough for tracking what a session does.
While this is not entirely incorrect, ISTM to be more logical to put it
closer to the session ID, and change the name so it is less misleading
in that sense.
Currently we have
session_id | 475e91da.291f
connection_from | [local]
process_id | 10527
process_line_num | 3
I propose we change it to
process_id | 10527
connection_from | [local]
session_id | 475e91da.291f
session_line_num | 3
Note changed column name. I also suggest we change the description of
%l in log_line_prefix to
% Number of the log line for each session, starting at 1
original is
Number of the log line for each process, starting at 1
Thoughts?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/CTMLCN8V17R4
"No necesitamos banderas
No reconocemos fronteras" (Jorge González)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-12-11 14:57:16 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-12-10 23:21:49 | Re: [HACKERS] BUG #3799: csvlog skips some logs |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Trevor Talbot | 2007-12-11 13:50:46 | Re: WORM and Read Only Tables (v0.1) |
| Previous Message | Mike Rylander | 2007-12-11 13:20:38 | Re: partitioned table query question |