From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Custom timestamp format in logs |
Date: | 2014-12-15 00:01:10 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqSJVCceTi2F+CyOB9dKKY1fkA3eVGgmHmhH_mrpCTq5Ug@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This week, we heard about a user willing to use a custom timestamp
>> format across a set of services to improve the debugability of the
>> whole set, Postgres being one of them. Unfortunately datestyle does
>> not take into account the logs. Would it be worth adding a new GUC
>> able to control the timestamp format in the logs?
>>
>> We could still redirect the logs with syslog and have a custom
>> timestamp format there, but in the case of this particular user syslog
>> was a no-go. Looking at the code, timestamp format is now hardcoded in
>> setup_formatted_log_time and setup_formatted_start_time when calling
>> pg_strftime @ elog.c, so it doesn't seem to be much complicated to do.
>>
>> Opinions? This thread is here for that.
>
>
> A separate GUC seems kind of weird.
Check.
> Wouldn't it be better with something like %(format)t or such in the log_line_prefix itself in that case?
> That could also be expanded to other parameters, should we need them?
Possible. I am not sure if we will be able to have a new parameter in
log_line_prefix as modulable as timestamps for formatting though.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ali Akbar | 2014-12-15 00:05:26 | Re: [REVIEW] Re: Fix xpath() to return namespace definitions |
Previous Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2014-12-14 21:53:38 | Re: Commitfest problems |