| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: warning message in standby |
| Date: | 2010-06-14 14:37:55 |
| Message-ID: | 201006141437.o5EEbtr19491@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> The correct log level for this message is LOG. End of discussion.
>
> > Why?
>
> Because it's not being issued in a user's session. The only place it
> can go is to the system log, and if you use a level of WARNING or less,
> it's likely to get filtered out by log_min_messages.
>
> I'm totally unimpressed by the argument that log-filtering applications
> don't know enough to pay attention to LOG messages. There are already a
> lot of those that are quite important to notice.
My point was that log filtering applications might ignore WARNING. They
don't usually ignore LOG.
8
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-14 14:38:08 | Re: warning message in standby |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-14 14:37:08 | Re: Typo in plperl doc ? |