From: "Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net>
> Is there a reason for there still being changes in guc.c, pgevent.c
> etc? Shouldn't it all be confined to pg_ctl now? That's my
> understanding from the thread that that's the only part we care about.
Yes, strictly speaking, those are useful for the original proposal.
However, they are still useful as refactoring, since the current code has
the default event source "PostgreSQL" in many places. Defining the default
name only at one location would make it easier for vendors like EnterpriseDB
to change the default name for their products. So I hope this will also be
included if you don't want to reject it by all means.
> More importantly, isn't it wrong to claim it will only be used for
> register and unregister? If we get an early failure in start, for
> example, there are numerous codepaths that will end up calling
> write_stderr(), which will use the eventlog when running as a service.
> Shouldn't the "-e" parameter be moved under "common options"?
Yes, you are right. -e is effective only if pg_ctl is invoked as a Windows
service. So it is written at register mode. That is, -e specifies the
event source used by the Windows service which is registered by "pg_ctl
register".
> I also think we should have the documentation specifically note that
> regular postgres output still goes to whatever the backend is
> configured to do. (and of course, any failure within the backend
> *before* we have parsed the config file for example will still go to
> the default source, and not the pg_ctl source - so we need to make it
> really clear that this is *only* for output from pg_ctl).
I see. I added this clarification to the description of -e. I would
appreciate it if you could correct my poor English when committing, if it
needs improvement.
Regards
MauMau