Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> writes:
> On 3/28/16 2:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> One idea is to invent a new elevel which is never sent to the client ---
>> analogously to COMMERROR, though probably much higher priority than that,
>> maybe the same priority as LOG. If there actually is a use for a range of
>> elevels on errhidefromclient'd messages, that wouldn't work very well of
>> course. Or we could consider having a flag bit that is OR'd into the
>> elevel <...>

> I think a flag would be more flexible than introducing a new log level.

I thought about this some more, and while the flag-bit approach definitely
has some attraction, it also has a big problem: there are lots of places
with code like "if (elevel >= ERROR)" which would be at risk of getting
confused, and I'm not confident we'd find them all. We could possibly
dodge that by shifting the elevel constants up a couple of bits and
putting the flag in the LSB rather than a high-order bit; but that's a
bit icky/risky too.

Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact
solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you
be wanting hide-from-client with an elevel different from LOG, anyway?

regards, tom lane