On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 05:04:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Joshua Tolley <eggyknap@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> However, I don't think I actually believe the premise of this patch,
> >> which is that sending log information to both stderr and syslog is
> >> a useful thing to do
> >
> > Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog, and some
> > to a file, and other stuff to another file. This patch doesn't do all that,
> > but lays the necessary groundwork.
>
> I don't think it does anything of the sort. Getting to that point by
> adding GUCs is quickly going to produce obviously unacceptable numbers
> of GUCs. Or if it isn't, then I'd like to hear the whole designed
> laid out. I think Magnus's idea of a separate config file is much
> more likely to be succesful than what we have here, but that too will
> require some design that hasn't been done yet.
>
> ...Robert
Having just sent two messages to the discussion about the wrong patch, I'll
apologize, and shut up now :)
--
Joshua Tolley / eggyknap
End Point Corporation
http://www.endpoint.com
