First I would ask what kind of logging you are talking about? I find
that simply turning on debug output on the server to print out the sql
statements being executed is generally all I need for logging, and the
server already supports that.
If your proposal it so use log4j for logging, then I would be opposed.
While logging is a good idea, having yet another non-postgresql
component that needs to be installed in order to build and/or run the
jdbc driver is in my opionion a bad idea. I already dislike the fact
that I have to install ant just to build the driver. It was so much
easier under 7.0 when make was all that was required.
thanks,
--Barry
>>
>> btoback@mac.com wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> One more question/comment.
>>>
>>> In order to track down the problem with the interaction between
>>> WebObjects and the PostgreSQL JDBC driver, I had to insert a fair
>>> amount of logging. This logging will be useful for anyone else who's
>>> in a similar position, trying to get some piece of middleware to work
>>> with PostgreSQL. If I switch to using log4j (see
>>> http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j for information), would it be useful
>>> to submit the logging calls as a patch?
>>>
>>> I think it would be extremely useful, but I don't know the
>>> philosophies or mindset of the PostgreSQL developers, so I thought
>>> I'd ask.
>>>
>>> -- Bruce
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Bruce Toback Tel: (602) 996-8601| My candle burns at both ends;
>>> OPT, Inc. (800) 858-4507| It will not last the night;
>>> 11801 N. Tatum Blvd. Ste. 142 | But ah, my foes, and oh, my
>>> friends -
>>> Phoenix AZ 85028 | It gives a lovely light.
>>> btoback@optc.com | -- Edna St. Vincent Millay
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>>
>>> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
