* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote: > > Re: Jeff Janes 2016-10-12 > > <CAMkU=1zmop5t70mx508nwff8tvv2jot+hgwlq8fnhlsxp-w...@mail.gmail.com> > >> Do you think the pushback will come from people who just accept the > >> defaults? > > > > I'm concerned about readability. "2016-10-12 20:14:30.449 CEST" is a > > lot of digits. My eyes can parse "20:14:30" as a timestamp, but > > "20:14:30.449" looks more like an IP address. (Admittedly I don't have > > experience with reading %m logs.) > > > > Overall, I'd prefer %t but %m would be ok as well. > > I'm fine with either! Both are much better than the empty string. > One of the problems with the status quo is that many users don't even > realize that log_line_prefix exists, so they don't configure it at > all. They don't even realize that they have the option to add a > prefix. I think configuring a non-empty default will be both better > by default and more likely to make people realize that they have > choices.
For my 2c, I'd rather have %m, but I definitely agree with Robert that we need to do *something* here and if the only thing holding us back is %t vs. %m, then let's just pick one and move on. I'll just hold my nose when I see the default and change it to %m. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature