"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> LOG is already over-used and so anything said at that level is
>> drowned. In many areas of code we cannot use a higher level
>> without trauma. That is a problem since we have no way to separate
>> the truly important from the barely interesting.
> The fact that LOG is categorized the same as INFO has led me to
> believe that they are morally equivalent --
They are not morally equivalent. INFO is for output that the user
has explicitly requested appear on his console (eg, via VACUUM VERBOSE).
So it's high priority for client output, not so much for log output.
LOG is for information that is considered high priority to log, but
not so much for client output (indeed maybe there is no client to output
it to).
If "LOG is over-used" then the problem is that we have LOG messages that
ought to be downgraded to DEBUG. A normally functioning system should
not be emitting *any* LOG messages during routine business, other than
ones that the user explicitly requested (like log_connections). We have
had this discussion in the past, in response to complaints that there
was too much log traffic, and have downgraded things that were poorly
categorized as LOG. Maybe there are some more of them in the HS/SR
code.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
