Barry Lind wrote:
> First I would ask what kind of logging you are talking about? I find
> that simply turning on debug output on the server to print out the sql
> statements being executed is generally all I need for logging, and the
> server already supports that.
>
> If your proposal it so use log4j for logging, then I would be opposed.
> While logging is a good idea, having yet another non-postgresql
> component that needs to be installed in order to build and/or run the
> jdbc driver is in my opionion a bad idea. I already dislike the fact
> that I have to install ant just to build the driver. It was so much
> easier under 7.0 when make was all that was required.
>
> thanks,
> --Barry
>
>
> btoback(at)mac(dot)com wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> One more question/comment.
>>
>> In order to track down the problem with the interaction between
>> WebObjects and the PostgreSQL JDBC driver, I had to insert a fair
>> amount of logging. This logging will be useful for anyone else who's
>> in a similar position, trying to get some piece of middleware to work
>> with PostgreSQL. If I switch to using log4j (see
>> http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j for information), would it be useful
>> to submit the logging calls as a patch?
>>
>> I think it would be extremely useful, but I don't know the
>> philosophies or mindset of the PostgreSQL developers, so I thought I'd
>> ask.
>>
>> -- Bruce
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Bruce Toback Tel: (602) 996-8601| My candle burns at both ends;
>> OPT, Inc. (800) 858-4507| It will not last the night;
>> 11801 N. Tatum Blvd. Ste. 142 | But ah, my foes, and oh, my
>> friends -
>> Phoenix AZ 85028 | It gives a lovely light.
>> btoback(at)optc(dot)com | -- Edna St. Vincent Millay
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>>
>
>