Re: logging blemishes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: logging blemishes
Date
Msg-id 4331B836.9040905@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: logging blemishes  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: logging blemishes
List pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>  
>
>>>>Example (log_line_prefix = '%t %q%u@%d %r %p %c:%l'):
>>>>
>>>>2005-09-19 19:16:39 EDT [unknown]@[unknown]  6541 432f46d7.198d:1 LOG:  
>>>>connection received: host=[local] port=
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>In the case above, I rather expected %q to kick in. With the additional 
>>tests it would.
>>
>>It's debatable, though, and not hugely important either way, I think.
>>    
>>
>
>Are you saying "connection received" should honor %q?  It seems it is a
>session line, rather than a server line, no?
>
>  
>

Maybe, the line just struck me as rather ugly. Never mind.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Table Partitioning is in 8.1
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump COMMENT ON DATABASE sometimes inappropriate