Re: logging stuff - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: logging stuff
Date
Msg-id 3F3004D8.8090704@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logging stuff  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: logging stuff
Re: logging stuff
List pgsql-hackers
Not quite the same - timestamps and pids have known formats, while db 
names are almost arbitrary. I know including spaces in names is horrible 
to my *nix way of thinking, but others might not have my prejudices. 
(interesting question - what characters are NOT allowed in a database 
name?).

BTW, we're talking about 5 extra chars per line here. I know it adds up, 
but these days disk space is cheap and plentiful - for a million log 
lines we're still only talking 5Mb (says he whose first machine had a 
whopping 20Mb of disk space, and who paid hundreds of (aussie) dollars 
for the extra 10 Mb.)

Syslog puts [] around pids, and typically has a lot of redundancy.

I'm prepared to be guided by concensus, though.

cheers

andrew


Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>  
>
>>The dbname patch is now done. If nobody objects to the format 
>>("[db:yourdbname]") I'll submit it - I did it that way to make it fairly 
>>easy to split a log file based on it, although you would have to be 
>>careful with multiline log entries such as query strings.
>>    
>>
>
>I'd tend to just put the dbname in a known column, and not bother with
>the decoration --- decoration adds up fast when it's on every log line,
>and I don't think it helps make the log more parseable.  Compare what we
>do with timestamps and pids.
>
>            regards, tom lane
>
>  
>




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO: trigger features
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: logging stuff