On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>>> Hey, maybe we could add a UUID to each ereport() call site ;-)
>
>> I can't help but feel we're designing a $10.00 solution to a $0.25
>> problem. I think I'd actually support adding something like a UUID to
>> every ereport and a filtering mechanism that works on that basis. But
>> let's face it: this particular message is exponentially more annoying
>> than average. We're basically forcing application developers to jump
>> through hoops to avoid filling the log with unnecessary chatter. I've
>> spent a bunch of time trying to get rid of them in various past jobs,
>> and I've never gotten any benefit out of having them. Maybe the
>> solution is to just demote that particular message to DEBUG1 and
>> declare that closing the connection is a perfectly sensible way for an
>> application to indicate that the conversation is over.
>
> I could support that with one tweak: it's only DEBUG1 if you don't
> have an open transaction. Dropping the connection while in a
> transaction *is* an application bug; I don't care how lazy the app
> programmer is feeling.
I agree.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
