Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering
От
David Steele
Тема
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering
Дата
Msg-id
5702A804.4020601@pgmasters.net
Ответ на
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering (Tom Lane)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
[PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Petr Jelinek <petr@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
On 4/4/16 12:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > David Steele writes: >> On 4/4/16 11:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I had in mind a patch that simply added LOG_SERVER_ONLY as another define >>> and did whatever seemed appropriate documentation-wise. I see no reason >>> to touch the places that are currently dealing with client communication >>> failures. > >> I still prefer to collapse them into a single value for the current >> implementation. > > Right, that's what I had in mind, sorry if I was unclear. I agree that > considering LOG_SERVER_ONLY as the main name and COMMERROR as an alias > is reasonable. > >> COMMERROR was not documented in sources.sgml so LOG_SERVER_ONLY wasn't >> either. I'm happy to do that that though it's not clear to me where it >> would go. I could just put it in the general description. > > Ah, I thought I remembered that the specific elevels were documented > there, but I see they're only documented in elog.h. Doesn't seem like > it's incumbent on this patch to improve that. > > Committed with a quick pgindent fixup. Thank you, and I appreciate you suggesting this simple solution. The advantage of this over the other possible solutions is that I can easily port the feature back to 9.5 by defining LOG_SERVER_ONLY when building pgaudit for that version. That's a big win in my mind. -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления