Re: Finer grain log timestamps - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Finer grain log timestamps
Date
Msg-id 2525299.1655737285@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Finer grain log timestamps  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>)
Responses Re: Finer grain log timestamps  (Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Do we *have* to provide support for arbitrary numbers of digits, though?
> We could provide support for only %.3t and %.6t specifically, and not
> worry about other cases (error: width not supported).

If I were coding it, I would allow only exactly 1 digit (%.Nt) to simplify
the parsing side of things and bound the required buffer size.  Without
having written it, it's not clear to me whether further restricting the
set of supported values would save much code.  I will point out, though,
that throwing an error during log_line_prefix processing will lead
straight to infinite recursion.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
Next
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Make COPY extendable in order to support Parquet and other formats