Re: WIP: Separate log file for extension

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Separate log file for extension
Date: 2017-08-28 01:40:11
Message-ID: CAMsr+YHxcK3FnB_3oQVrD+3gy=yuBij7oO2Nhfg2QnmyNwvwdg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 25 August 2017 at 15:12, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:

> Attached is a draft patch to allow extension to write log messages to a
> separate file.

I like the idea a lot. I'm not so sure about the approach.

How will this play with syslog? csvlog? etc?

I wonder if a level of indirection is appropriate here, where extensions
(or postgres subsystems, even) provide a log stream label. Then the logging
backed takes care of using that appropriately for the logging mechanism in
use; for logging to file that'd generally be separate files. Same for
CSVlog. Other mechanisms could be left as stubs initially.

So the outcome would be the same, just without the assumption of specific
file name and output mechanism baked in.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2017-08-28 02:12:06 Re: pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2017-08-28 01:39:28 Re: pgbench: faster version of tpcb-like transaction