Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering
Date
Msg-id 9677.1459783275@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
Responses Re: [PROPOSAL] Client Log Output Filtering  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> writes:
> On 3/29/16 12:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ...  Basically,
>> my point is that LOG_ONLY achieves 95% of the benefit for probably
>> 0.01% of the work.

> Attached is a patch that re-purposes COMMERROR as LOG_SERVER_ONLY.  I 
> went ahead and replaced all instances of COMMERROR with LOG_SERVER_ONLY.

Uh, what?  COMMERROR is a distinct concept in my opinion.  It might happen
to share the same implementation today, but that doesn't make it the
same thing.

I had in mind a patch that simply added LOG_SERVER_ONLY as another define
and did whatever seemed appropriate documentation-wise.  I see no reason
to touch the places that are currently dealing with client communication
failures.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: Tiny patch: sigmask.diff
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw : altering foreign table not invalidating prepare statement execution plan.