Thanks Fujii, I like both of those suggestions. I’ll incorporate them into a v2.
On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 5:24 PM Fujii Masao <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, May 8, 2026 at 4:39 AM Daniel Bauman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I have attached a patch making the change in the note under the > logging_collector ( > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/runtime-config-logging.html#GUC-LOGGING-COLLECTOR) > instead of on the log_statement parameter as I had initially suggested. > > > > I agree that's better place. > > > > I'm open to any feedback. I've tried to keep the details vague while > calling out for non-technical users that it is possible to have > transactions complete without associated logs making it to disk. > > > > Another change I'd like to know your thoughts on is whether changing the > existing wording that says "The logging collector is designed to never lose > messages." is appropriate. This statement reads like a strong guarantee to > me. I think it could be helpful to phrase it in a way that makes it clearer > that the logging collector will delay the application if it can't keep up > with logging volume without saying something as strong as "never lose > messages". > > If you think it is a good idea I can add a change in the patch to reword > it to something weaker like "The logging collector is designed to avoid > losing messages." > > Since the point of this description seems that the logging collector does > not > have something like well-known syslog's rate-limiting behavior (i.e., > dropping > messages under very high log volume), I'd prefer wording like: > > The logging collector is designed to avoid dropping messages even under > very high log volume. > > Thought? > > > + The logging collector writes to disk asynchronously. The server > + losing power or errors when writing to the log file > + can result in messages not being persisted. > > "writes to disk asynchronously" feels a bit ambiguous to me. > How about something like: > > The logging collector does not guarantee that log messages have > reached durable storage. > A system crash, power loss, or an error while writing the log file > can still result in messages > being lost. > > Regards, > > -- > Fujii Masao >
