On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> On 01/14/2011 05:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It actually sounded like a pretty good idea to me.
>
>> If you have a format string, what do you want to do with the bits of the
>> format that aren't field references?
>
> I was thinking of it as being strictly a field list. I don't know
> whether it's really practical to borrow log_line_prefix's one-character
> names for the fields (for one thing, there would need to be names for
> all the existing CSV columns, not all of which equate to log_line_prefix
> escapes); but in any case anything other than field references would be
> disallowed. If you prefer to use a name list as the syntax that's fine
> with me.
I think we're in the process of designing a manned mission to Mars to
solve the problem that our shoelaces are untied.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
