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

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobsBqGOD9-FodarKFoafbS3vUEfV-_ouHnuNFi6m5OuDg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function  ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Karl O. Pinc <kop@meme.com> wrote:
> Seems to me that the file format should
> be documented if there's any intention that the end user
> look at or otherwise use the file's content.
>
> It's fine with me if the content of current_logfiles
> is supposed to be internal to PG and not exposed
> to the end user.  I'm writing to make sure that
> this is a considered decision.

On the whole, documenting it seems better than documenting it,
provided there's a logical place to include it in the existing
documentation.

But, anyway, Michael shouldn't remove it without some explanation or discussion.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: Clarifying "server starting" messaging in pg_ctlstart without --wait