| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Custom timestamp format in logs |
| Date: | 2014-12-15 00:09:06 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRubxoguGU5d2JZTRJX5ELY9UCGyb1qXcLUZ-VkFB9kgg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> You could argue that pgBadger et al could just document that they don't
> support nonstandard timestamp formats ... but then it's really unclear why
> we're shifting the complexity burden in this direction rather than asking
> why the one proprietary application that wants the other thing can't cope
> with the existing format choice.
Well, the opposite side can argue exactly the contrary with the user
hat: why doesn't Postgres allow this kind of customization, knowing
that the other things running on my server can do it?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-12-15 00:19:38 | Re: pg_basebackup vs. Windows and tablespaces |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-12-15 00:09:04 | Re: pg_basebackup vs. Windows and tablespaces |