Re: replication commands and log_statements

On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 2014-06-11 14:22:43 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > Yes, but how would you specify for example "i want DDL and all
> replication
> > commands" (which is quite a reasonable thing to log, I believe). If you
> > actually require it to be set to "all", most people won't have any use at
> > all for it...
>
> That's a reasonable feature request - but imo it's a separate
> one. It seems pretty noncontroversial and simple to make
> log_statement=all log replication commands. What you want - and you're
> sure not alone with that - is something considerably more complex...
>
>
I'm just saying if we're going to do it, let's do it right from the
beginning.

Or are you suggesting this would be something we'd backpatch? Given the
lack of complaints about it, I'd rather suggest we don't backpatch
anything, and instead make the correct feature in the first pace for the
next release.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/