* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > > Including the value of listen_addresses along w/ the port would make it > > useful. If we really don't want the cluster-name concept (which, > > personally, I like quite a bit), how about including the listen_address > > value if it isn't '*'? > > Nah, let's do cluster name. That way, somebody who's only got one > postmaster isn't suddenly going to see a lot of useless clutter, > ie the user gets to decide what to add to ps output. "SHOW cluster_name" > might be useful at the application level as well, I suspect.
Ah, yes, agreed, that could be quite useful.
> I still think the brackets are unnecessary though.
Either way is fine for me on this.
> Also, -1 for adding another log_line_prefix escape. If you're routing
> multiple clusters logging to the same place (which is already a bit
> unlikely IMO), you can put distinguishing strings in log_line_prefix
> already. And it's not like we've got an infinite supply of letters
> for those escapes.
Agreed.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
