Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I have coded up the following patch which places LOG just above ERROR in > > log_min_error_statement. > > LOG_NO_STATEMENT? What *are* you thinking? The kindest word I can find > for this is "baroque". > > What I had in mind was a one-line patch: > > if (edata->elevel >= log_min_error_statement && debug_query_string != > NULL) > > becomes > > if (is_log_level_output(edata->elevel, log_min_error_statement) && > debug_query_string != NULL)
What are *you* thinking? Yes, that patch has that line, but log_statement and log_min_duration_statement is going to trigger log_min_error_statement so you are going to get the statement printed twice. LOG_NO_STATEMENT fixes that. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
