Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> The correct log level for this message is LOG. �End of discussion.
>
> > Why?
>
> Because it's not being issued in a user's session. The only place it
> can go is to the system log, and if you use a level of WARNING or less,
> it's likely to get filtered out by log_min_messages.
>
> I'm totally unimpressed by the argument that log-filtering applications
> don't know enough to pay attention to LOG messages. There are already a
> lot of those that are quite important to notice.
My point was that log filtering applications might ignore WARNING. They
don't usually ignore LOG.
8
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
