(Resent with subscribed email address, thanks gmail)
Hi Andres, thanks for the extremely fast review!
On 27 April 2018 at 11:46, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
> > I don't see any tests for auto_explain so haven't added any test cases.
>
>> > Happy to do so if that's deemed necessary.
>
>>
> I'd be in favor of adding them.
>
OK, sure.
> > +static int auto_explain_log_destination = LOG;
>
>>
> I very much dislike this name - it's too similar too the log_destination
> GUC, while being about something different. How about "log_level"?
>
Works for me.
> > +static const struct config_enum_entry destination_options[] = {
>
>> > + {"log", LOG, false},
>
>> > + {"notice", NOTICE, false},
>
>> > + {NULL, 0, false}
>
>> > +};
>
>>
> I'd argue this should contain the non-error cases. It's just as
> reasonable to want to add this as a debug level or such.
>
So all of warning, info, debug and debug1-5?
Thanks
Tom
