Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> ... So I think the logging setup I had in
>> my patch is pretty much the only sane way to do it, and we just have
>> to decide whether it's worth exposing at default log level or not.
> I definitely think we should include it at the default log level. We
> certainly wouldn't be the first daemon process to do so (bind9 comes to
> mind, but I notice ntpd, nrpe, and strongswan do also, and probably some
> others).
I'm leaning in that direction as well now. I think we could address
Robert's concern about startup chattiness by downgrading the other
mentioned messages to DEBUG1. I will check, but I'm pretty sure that
there is already adequate logging for subprocess startup failure ---
and if there is not, that would be a bug in itself.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
