Re: elog() patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: elog() patch
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.30.0203012220040.687-100000@peter.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: elog() patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian writes:

> Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe I have the ordering wrong for server_min_messages.  Perhaps it
> > > should be:
> > >
> > >     DEBUG5-1, INFO, NOTICE/WARNING, ERROR, LOG, FATAL, PANIC
> > >
> > > Nothing prevents us from doing that.  Well, anyway, not sure how much I
> > > like it but I throw it out as an idea.
> >
> > Ah, yes, that sounds optimal to me.
>
> What do others think of this.  I can easily do it.

I'd rather keep NOTICE instead of WARNING.  It's just to keep things
looking familiar a bit.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: timestamp_part() bug?
Next
From: "D'Arcy J.M. Cain"
Date:
Subject: Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!!