Re: Doc update proposal for the note on log_statement in the runtime config for logging page

From: Daniel Bauman <danielbaniel(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doc update proposal for the note on log_statement in the runtime config for logging page
Date: 2026-05-07 19:39:06
Message-ID: CAMtj0_bPJO8roA_NzXh32J=yYoB_vF_Rn42m2Cyb2NH_pPstzQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I have attached a patch making the change in the note under the
logging_collector (
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/runtime-config-logging.html#GUC-LOGGING-COLLECTOR)
instead of on the log_statement parameter as I had initially suggested.

I'm open to any feedback. I've tried to keep the details vague while
calling out for non-technical users that it is possible to have
transactions complete without associated logs making it to disk.

Another change I'd like to know your thoughts on is whether changing the
existing wording that says "The logging collector is designed to never lose
messages." is appropriate. This statement reads like a strong guarantee to
me. I think it could be helpful to phrase it in a way that makes it clearer
that the logging collector will delay the application if it can't keep up
with logging volume without saying something as strong as "never lose
messages".
If you think it is a good idea I can add a change in the patch to reword it
to something weaker like "The logging collector is designed to avoid losing
messages."

Thanks for your time,
-Daniel

p.s. I started this thread in the hackers list but this is a doc change.
Let me know if I should replace hackers with the doc list in my next reply.

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Update-docs-for-log_collector-about-error-cases.patch application/octet-stream 1.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-05-07 19:39:44 Re: PostgreSQL and OpenSSL 4.0.0
Previous Message Cary Huang 2026-05-07 19:32:51 Re: PostgreSQL and OpenSSL 4.0.0