On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:25 PM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> I think you mean DEBUG1? It's already at DEBUG2.
>
> I considered using DEBUG1 but decided against it. The other exclusions
> will produce a limited amount of output because there are only a few of
> them. In the case of unlogged tables there could be any number of
> exclusions and I thought that was too noisy for DEBUG1.
+1. Even DEBUG2 seems pretty chatty for a message that just tells you
that something is working in an entirely expected fashion; consider
DEBUG3. Fortunately, base backups are not so common that this should
cause enormous log spam either way, but keeping the amount of debug
output down to a reasonable level is an important goal. Before
a43f1939d5dcd02f4df1604a68392332168e4be0, it wasn't really practical
to run a production server with log_min_messages lower than DEBUG2,
because you'd get so much log spam it would cause performance problems
(and maybe fill up the disk).
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
