That assumes we know what the shape of the log tables will be, but this
isn't quite clear to me - I can imagine it being different for different
needs. Having an external program to parse the logs into INSERT
statements would not be hard, anyway, so I'm not sure that this would
buy us much. I'll think about it more. In any case, it should be done in
stages, I think, with the first stage simply being what we do now with
the optional dbname field added.
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>One idea would be to output log information as INSERT statements, so we
>could log connection/dbname/username to one table, and per-session
>information to another table, and server-level info in a third table.
>
>If you want to analyze the logs, you could load the data into a database
>via inserts, and even do joins and analyze the output using SQL!
>
>This would solve the problem of failed transactions exporting
>information, would not be extra overhead for every log message, and
>would handle the problem of analyzing the log tables while the system
>was running and continuing to emit more log output.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>>There seem to be 2 orthogonal issues here - in effect how to log and
>>where to log. I had a brief look and providing an option to log the
>>dbname where appropriate seems to be quite easy - unless someone else is
>>already doing it I will look at it on the weekend. Assuming that were
>>done you could split the log based on dbname.
>>
>>For the reasons Tom gives, logging to a table looks much harder and
>>possibly undesirable - I would normally want my log table(s) in a
>>different database, possibly even on a different machine, from my
>>production transactional database. However, an ISP might want to provide
>>the logs for each client in their designated db. It therefore seems to
>>me far more sensible to do load logs into tables out of band as Tom
>>suggests, possibly with some helper tools in contrib to parse the logs,
>>or even to load them in more or less real time (many tools exist to do
>>this sort of thing for web logs, so it is hardly rocket science -
>>classic case for a perl script ;-).
>>
>>cheers
>>
>>andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>