Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Your wish just seems like a separate feature to me. Including > replication commands in 'all' seems correct independent of the desire > for a more granular control.
No, I think I've got to vote with the other side on that. The reason we can have log_statement as a scalar progression "none < ddl < mod < all" is that there's little visible use-case for logging DML but not DDL, nor for logging SELECTS but not INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE. However, logging replication commands seems like something people would reasonably want an orthogonal control for. There's no nice way to squeeze such a behavior into log_statement. I guess you could say that log_statement treats replication commands as if they were DDL, but is that really going to satisfy users? I think we should consider log_statement to control logging of SQL only, and invent a separate GUC (or, in the future, likely more than one GUC?) for logging of replication activity. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers