Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 11:28:22AM +0000, Andreas Pflug wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > >I did not include pg_logdir_ls because that was basically pg_ls_dir with > > >logic to decode the log file name and convert it to a timestamp. That > > >seemed best done in the client. > > > > IMHO omitting pg_logdir_ls is a bad idea, because the function is > > intended to hide server internal's naming scheme from the user. We want > > as few server side implementation specific client side code as possible. > > BTW, it surprised me that one of the functions (don't remember which > one) expected the log files to be named in a very specific fashion. So > there's no flexibility for changing the log_prefix. Probably it's not > so bad, but strange anyway. Is this for "security" reasons?
Righ, pg_logdir_ls() was the function. My feeling is that the application has access to the log_directory and log_filename values and can better and move flexibly filter pg_ls_dir() on the client end than we can do on the server. It just seemed like something that we better done outside the server. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us email@example.com | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster