> How should skipped transactions should be taken into account in the log file
> output, with and without aggregation? I assume we'll want to have some trace
> of skipped transactions in the logs.
The problem with this point is that how to report something "not done" is
unclear, especially as the logic of the log is one line per performed
transaction.
Obviously we can log something, but as the transaction are not performed
the format would be different, which break the expectation of a simple and
homogeneous log file format that people like to process directly.
So bar any great idea, I would suggest not to log skipped transactions and
to wait for someone to need to have access to this detailed information
and for whom the final report is not enough.
--
Fabien.
