* Peter Eisentraut (peter_e@gmx.net) wrote:
> On 4/30/15 6:05 AM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > The specification of "session audit logging" seems to be still unclear to me.
>
> As I had mentioned previously, I would prefer session audit logging to
> be integrated with the normal statement logging configuration.
I'd certainly love to see the logging in core be improved, but that's
also rather tangential to this extension and we could certainly have
both quite happily. Further, being able to configure and have
consistent information from the extension is valuable even if options
are added to the in-core logging to make it more flexible.
One particular advantage of having the extension is that having it
doesn't impact existing users of the in-core logging system. I don't
recall any specific proposals for improving the in-core logging system
to add the capabilities for session logging that the extension
provides, but it seems likely to require changes to at least the CSV
format, new log_line_prefix escape codes (which we're using quite a
few of already...), new GUCs, and potentially behavior changes to make
it work. As I say above, I'm happy to have those discussions (and
I've been party to them quite a few times in the past...), but it
seems unlikely to seriously reduce the usefulness of session logging
being in the extension and producing consistent output with the object
logging.
Thanks!
Stephen
