On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 21:01, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> ... lack either the note about defaulting to GMT or the hint. I guess
>>> we should add both of those to the failure cases in the Windows version
>>> of identify_system_timezone. Should we also change the WARNING errlevel
>>> to LOG? I think the latter is more likely to actually get into the log.
>
>> You are suggesting adding this after the "could not find match"
>> message, correct? Not replacing it? Because if we replace it, we loose
>> the information of what we failed to match. So basically like
>> attached?
>
> No, I was thinking more like the attached. This changes the Unix code
> to separate the info about the fallback timezone into errdetail, and
> then makes the Windows messages follow that style.
Yeah, that looks good.
>> Also, would LOG be *more* likely to be seen than a WARNING? Why would that be?
>
> Because that's how log levels sort for the postmaster log. This isn't
> an interactive warning --- we will never be executing this code in a
> regular backend, only in the postmaster.
Well, when the dba looks through the log, he'll be looking a lot
harder at something that says WARNING.
And if somebody is filtering his log so hard that it doesn't even
contain WARNING's, frankly, he's ignorant ;)
But that's just me, and I've never really agreed with that soring in
the first place, so maybe I should just be ignored...
-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
