On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I thought Peter's suggestion for regression test drivers was a good one > and I see no reason to block that. Why do you (Tom) object so strongly > against having a different one on buildfarm than elsewhere? I'd rather > have buildfarm adopt the new suggestion than having buildfarm drive the > new stuff. > > Adopting a default prefix is a different question. For one thing IMHO > it should not have %a (application name). Christoph's suggestion > (Debian's default) seemed good.
Yeah, I like Cristoph's suggestion fine. It meets my criteria of "includes timestamp and PID" and overall seems reasonable. If we adopted that across the board, it wouldn't be too much different from what Peter proposed for the regression test. Just to compare. Christoph/Debian: log_line_prefix = '%t [%p-%l] %q%u@%d ' Peter: log_line_prefix = '%t [%p]: [%l] %qapp=%a ' So Peter's got %p and %l separated by "]: [" whereas Christoph has them separated only by a dash. Presumably that's minor. Then they've both got %q. After that, Christoph has %u@%d, which seems reasonable for an actual system, and Peter's got app=%a, which is better for the regression tests because the user name will depend on the UNIX username of the person running the tests. So how about we adopt both suggestions, except changing Peter's to '%t [%p-%l] %qapp=%a ' so that they are a bit more similar? I bet that would make more people happier than it would make less happy. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers