Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering
Date: 2016-04-04 15:21:15
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> writes:
> On 3/29/16 12:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... Basically,
>> my point is that LOG_ONLY achieves 95% of the benefit for probably
>> 0.01% of the work.

> Attached is a patch that re-purposes COMMERROR as LOG_SERVER_ONLY. I
> went ahead and replaced all instances of COMMERROR with LOG_SERVER_ONLY.

Uh, what? COMMERROR is a distinct concept in my opinion. It might happen
to share the same implementation today, but that doesn't make it the
same thing.

I had in mind a patch that simply added LOG_SERVER_ONLY as another define
and did whatever seemed appropriate documentation-wise. I see no reason
to touch the places that are currently dealing with client communication

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-04-04 15:23:34 Re: postgres_fdw : altering foreign table not invalidating prepare statement execution plan.
Previous Message Aleksander Alekseev 2016-04-04 15:19:46 Re: Tiny patch: sigmask.diff