Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)
Date
Msg-id 5446.989073871@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> There's a TODO item to make elog(LOG) a separate level.  I propose the
> name INFO.  It would be identical to DEBUG in effect, only with a
> different label.

This conveys nothing to my mind.  How should I determine whether a given
elog call ought to use INFO or DEBUG?

> The stricter distinction between DEBUG and INFO would also yield the
> possibility of optionally sending DEBUG output to the frontend, as has
> been requested a few times.

It's not a "strict distinction" unless we have a clear policy as to what
the different levels mean.  I think setting and documenting that policy
is the hard part of the task.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Oleg Bartunov
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST indexing problems...
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST indexing problems...