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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix
Date
Msg-id 32719.1476292303@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix
Re: Non-empty default log_line_prefix
List pgsql-hackers
Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org> wrote:
>> Patch attached. (Still using %t, I don't think %m makes sense for the
>> default.)

> What is the cost of using %m, other than 4 (rather compressible) bytes per
> log entry?

More log I/O, which is not free ... and that remark about compressibility
is bogus for anyone who doesn't pipe their postmaster stderr into gzip.
I'm already afraid that adding the timestamps will get us some pushback
about log volume.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove "Source Code" column from \df+ ?
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Polyphase merge is obsolete