| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering |
| Date: | 2016-03-29 16:33:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20160329163319.GB23540@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-03-29 12:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > David Steele wrote:
> >> On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact
> >>> solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you
> >>> be wanting hide-from-client with an elevel different from LOG, anyway?
>
> > So audit records would use COMMERROR? That sounds really bad to me.
>
> My proposal would be to invent a new elevel macro, maybe LOG_ONLY,
> for this purpose. But under the hood it'd be the same as COMMERROR.
A couple years back I proposed making thinks like COMERROR into flags |
ed into elevel, rather than distinct levels. I still think that's a
better approach; and it doesn't force us to forgo using distinct log
levels.
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shulgin, Oleksandr | 2016-03-29 16:34:57 | Re: Add schema-qualified relnames in constraint error messages. |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2016-03-29 16:30:12 | Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering |