On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2015-07-09 20:08 GMT+02:00 Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com>: >> >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > 2015-07-09 15:17 GMT+02:00 Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Pavel Stehule >> >> <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi >> >> > >> >> > second version of this patch >> >> > >> >> > make check-world passed >> >> >> >> quickly scanning the patch, the implementation is trivial (minus >> >> regression test adjustments), and is, IMSNSHO, the right solution. >> > >> > >> > yes, it is right way - the behave of RAISE statement will be much more >> > cleaner >> >> >> >> >> >> Several of the source level comments need some minor wordsmithing and >> >> the GUCs are missing documentation. If we've got consensus on the >> >> approach, I'll pitch in on that. >> > >> > thank you >> >> revised patch attached. added GUC docs and cleaned up pg_settings >> language. Also tested patch and it works beautifully. >> >> Note, Pavel's patch does adjust default behavior to what we think is >> the "right" settings. > > > Thank you for documentation. > > There is small error - default for client_min_context is error - not notice. > With this level a diff from regress tests is minimal. Default for > log_min_context should be warning.
whoop! thanks. Also, I was playing a bit with the idea of making client_min_context "superuser only" setting. The idea being this could be used to prevent leakage of stored procedure code in cases where the admins don't want it to be exposed. I figured it was a bad idea though; it would frustrate debugging in reasonable cases. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
