From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | gabrielle <gorthx(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] log_statement docs |
Date: | 2010-02-25 19:20:41 |
Message-ID: | 201002251920.o1PJKfM01351@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > gabrielle wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >>> Shouldn't it just say "all means all", if we think that needs to be
> >>> explained?
> >>
> >> I think it should say something about the "all" option. I read &
> >> re-read that section trying to figure out what the difference between
> >> "mod" and "all" was, and finally asked on the irc channel. As it
> >> stands, it essentially says "there are three options to this command,
> >> but we're only going to tell you about two of them." :)
>
> > Well, if you take a look at utility.c:GetCommandLogLevel() you will see
> > that ALL includes a lot more commands than just SELECT.
>
> Yeah. My objection was not to documenting ALL, it was to documenting it
> with exactly that sentence, which seems both needlessly complicated and
> subject to errors of omission.
I have applied the following patch with adds "off" and "all statements"
identifiers. This is probaby the right level of detail for this.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
/rtmp/diff | text/x-diff | 1.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | gabrielle | 2010-02-25 19:27:37 | Re: [PATCH] log_statement docs |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-25 19:07:57 | Re: [PATCH] log_statement docs |