Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Devrim Gündüz
Subject Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix
Date
Msg-id 1476299121.2670.129.camel@gunduz.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 13:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > What is the cost of using %m, other than 4 (rather compressible) bytes per
> > log entry?
>
> More log I/O, which is not free ...

FWIW, we've been setting log_line_prefix to '< %m > ' for quite a long time in
PGDG RPMs, and did not get any complaints. I'd vote for %m for default.

Regards,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation)
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix