"Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net> writes:
> On Friday August 27 2004 12:08, Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ justification please ]
> Yes, should have said more on that item. First, I didn't see how to easily
> make it configurable in combination with strftime() without doing more
> work, and it didn't appear to be worth the effort. By its addition,
> hard-coding the PID into the filename deviates from what I would argue is
> the de facto standard of Apache's rotatelogs and forces a naming convention
> where none existed before. That creates work for us as we have a
> considerable infrastructure setup to deal with logs; I suspect that may be
> the case with others. I looked, but did not find, justification for why it
> was introduced; I would assume it was added to allow for multiple
> postmasters sharing the same log directory. I had difficulty fathoming the
> usefulness of this being hard-coded, as it seems one could compensate
> easily through the configurable 'log_filename' if one chose to share a log
> directory among postmasters. Not by including the PID, but by some other
> postmaster-unique naming approach. Given its a new 'feature', I'm hoping
> it can be altered to return the freedom of filenaming to the administrator.
Or you could use different log_directory settings for different PMs.
Fair enough.
Anyone else have an opinion pro or con about this change? IMHO it's in
the gray area between bug fix and feature addition. If we want to do
it, though, doing it now is certainly better than holding it for 8.1,
since by then people would have gotten used to the present behavior.
BTW, as long as we are taking Apache as the de facto standard --- does
the default of "postgresql-%Y-%m-%d_%H%M%S.log" actually make sense, or
would something different be closer to the common practice with Apache?
regards, tom lane
