Re: Why does LOG have higher priority than ERROR and WARNING?

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Can I reorder them to ERROR > WARNING > LOG ?
>
> No. That was an intentional decision. LOG is for stuff that we
> really want to get logged, in most cases. ERROR is very often not
> that interesting, and WARNING even more so.

I think the decision is in hacker's viewpoint. Many times I see
DBAs are interested in only WARNING, ERROR and FATAL, but often
ignores LOG messages. We should use WARNING level for really important
message -- and also priority of WARNINGs should be higher than LOGs.

Another matter is that we use LOG level both cases of important
activity logging and mere performance or query logging. Maybe
we should have used another log level (PERFORMANCE?) for the
latter case, and its priority is less than WARNINGs and LOGs.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center