On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Something along these lines would be OK with me (I haven't yet
>> validated every detail), but there were previous objections to adding
>> any new fields to log_line_prefix until we had a flexible CSV format.
>> I think that's raising the bar a bit too high, personally, but I don't
>> have the only vote around here...
>
> I think I was the one objecting. I don't necessarily say that we have
> to have a "flexible" CSV format, but I do say that facilities that are
> available in log_line_prefix and not in CSV logs are a bad thing.
Well, I guess the other option is to just add it to the format, full
stop. But as someone pointed out previously, that's not a terribly
scalable solution, but perhaps it could be judged adequate for this
particular case.
While I generally agree with the principal, I also wonder if it might
be better to just add this field in log_line_prefix and wait for
someone to complain about that as other than a theoretical matter.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company