On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 2:06 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I think ideally it would have been better if we could have logged
>> > replication commands under separate log_level, but as still there
>> > is no consensus on extending log_statement and nobody is even
>> > willing to pursue, it seems okay to go ahead and log these under
>> > 'all' level.
>>
>> I think the consensus is clearly for a separate GUC.
>
> +1.
Okay. Attached is the updated version of the patch which I posted before.
This patch follows the consensus and adds separate parameter
"log_replication_command".
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao