Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gilles Darold
Subject Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Date
Msg-id 6336d5dc-ad3d-84df-7eeb-01c6b391298e@dalibo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
Responses Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Le 29/10/2016 à 14:38, Karl O. Pinc a écrit :
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200
> Gilles Darold <gilles.darold@dalibo.com> wrote:
>
>> ...
>> v9 of the patch, attached here.
> Attached are 2 more documentation patchs to apply on
> top of your v9 patch.
>
>
> patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_current_logfiles
>
> Explains the current_logfiles file in the
> narrative documentation.  It's not like I want
> to toot our horn here.  I'm afraid that otherwise
> no one will notice the feature.
>
>
> patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_indexes
>
> Fixes an index entry and add more.
>
> Regards,
>
> Karl <kop@meme.com>
> Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
>                  -- Robert A. Heinlein

The attached v10 of the current_logfiles patch include your last changes
on documentation but not the patch on v9 about the user-supplied GUC
value. I think the v10 path is ready for committers and that the
additional patch to add src/include/utils/guc_values.h to define user
GUC values is something that need to be taken outside this one. Imo,
thoses GUC values (stderr, csvlog) are not expected to change so often
to require a global definition, but why not, if committers think this
must be done I can add it to a v11 patch.

Best regards,

--
Gilles Darold
Consultant PostgreSQL
http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Speed of user-defined aggregates using array_append as transfn
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: make coverage-html on OS X