Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function

From: "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Date: 2016-03-11 09:49:15
Message-ID: CACACo5QHXucrYOcf_xMo9=kGkuhx=XSURnahO0vzEKGBhJCPnQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com> writes:
> > Then, should I have to use an alternate file to store the information or
> > implement a bidirectional communication with the syslogger?
>
> I'd just define a new single-purpose file $PGDATA/log_file_name
> or some such.
>

Would it make sense to have it as a symlink instead?

--
Alex

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mithun Cy 2016-03-11 10:04:48 Re: Explain [Analyze] produces parallel scan for select Into table statements.
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2016-03-11 09:36:31 Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records