On Sat, Apr 14, 2018, 4:33 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2018-04-15 00:31:14 +0200, David Fetter wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 01:20:16PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > > On 2018-04-14 18:05:18 +0200, David Fetter wrote: > > > > CSV is very poorly specified, which makes it at best complicated to > > > > build correct parsing libraries. JSON, whatever gripes I have about > > > > the format[1] is extremely well specified, and hence has excellent > > > > parsing libraries. > > > > > > Worth to notice that useful json formats for logging also kinda don't > > > follow standards. Either you end up with entire logfiles as one big > > > array, which most libraries won't parse and makes logrotate etc really > > > complicated, or you end up with some easy to parse format where > newlines > > > have non-standard record separator meaning. > > > > I don't see this as a big problem. The smallest-lift thing is to put > > something along the lines of: > > > > When you log as JSON, those logs are JSON objects, one per output > > event. They are not guaranteed to break on newlines. > > > > A slightly larger lift would include escaping newlines and ensuring > > that JSON output is always single lines, however long. > > Still obliterates your "standard standard standard" line of > argument. There seem to valid arguments for adding json regardless, but > that line is just bogus. > > Greetings, > > Andres Freund > The format is known as JSON Lines. http://jsonlines.org/ Ryan >
