> > Precisely my point. I think working hard on syslog support inside elog
> > is misplaced effort.
>
> Well, I can think of a few things:
> 1.) Some messages are more important than others. Syslog levels are
> useful to segreggate debug, errors, informational, and critical
> messages.
> 2.) Critical messages might need to go to more than one place, while
> debug messages might need to be dropped silently unless further
> configuration, etc, is performed.
> 3.) Some messages need immediate attention -- syslog can go to the
> console for level 'crit' messages.
>
> I know that those three points are part of the same point -- but stderr
> is but a single stream, relegating all messages to the same priority. I
> might want to keep critical messages far longer than debug messages. I
> might want to keep FATAL, REALLYFATAL, and even ERROR messages longer
> than logs of queries (a likely scenario).
Good point.
> Syslog support in elog(), with proper errorlevel coding, allows the
> admin to segregate messages as he sees fit. Using logger(1) means all
> messages are the same.
Totally agreed.
There are still many loggings using just plain fprintf(). They should
be replaced by elog(DEBUG) or elog(NOTICE), IMHO.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
