On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 23:03, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Then why not send everything to syslog and have syslog
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 23:03, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut
2009/9/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 23:03, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 6:51 AM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
I think it's better to spool the log messages to files, and then let
the external utility read the files. The external utility can still
fall behind, but even if it does the cluster will continue running.
The
[ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ]
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2009/9/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
The problem with having the syslogger send the data directly to an
external process is that the external process might be unable to
process the data as
Tom Lane escribió:
[ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ]
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2009/9/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
The problem with having the syslogger send the data directly to an
external process is that the external process might be unable to
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Tom Lane escribió:
[ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ]
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2009/9/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
The problem with having the syslogger send the data
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
This is the same issue already raised with respect to syslog versus
syslogger, ie, some people would rather lose log data than have the
backends block waiting for it to be written.
That could be made configurable; i.e. let
Robert Haas escribió:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Tom Lane escribió:
[ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ]
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
2009/9/28 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com:
The problem with
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Tom Lane escribió:
[ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ]
Magnus Hagander
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
This is the same issue already raised with respect to syslog versus
syslogger, ie, some people would rather lose log data than have the
backends block waiting for it to be written.
That could be
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Tom Lane escribió:
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
This is the same issue already raised with respect to syslog versus
syslogger, ie, some people would rather lose log data than have the
backends block waiting for it
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
syslog uses a nonblocking file descriptor without a retry loop to
implement their logic. I see no reason we couldn't do that ourselves.
Mixing it with regular blocking code could turn out to be nontrivial,
but I don't think
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
syslog uses a nonblocking file descriptor without a retry loop to
implement their logic. I see no reason we couldn't do that ourselves.
Mixing it with regular blocking code could turn out to be
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 14:58 -0600, Joshua Tolley wrote:
Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog,
and some
to a file, and other stuff to another file. This patch doesn't do all
that,
but lays the necessary groundwork.
Then why not send everything to syslog and
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 14:58 -0600, Joshua Tolley wrote:
Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog,
and some to a file, and other stuff to another file. This patch
doesn't do all that, but lays the necessary groundwork.
Then
On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Then why not send everything to syslog and have syslog filter it to the
places you want to? That is what syslog is for, after all.
We send all syslog output with the same
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, 2009-09-27 at 16:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
Then why not send everything to syslog and have syslog filter it to the
places you want to? That is what syslog is for, after
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com writes:
Having just sent two messages to the discussion about the wrong patch,
I'll
apologize, and shut up now :)
No need to apologize --- this really is, and should
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
I also agree with Tom's comments that we don't have consensus on where
this should go. I think it would help a lot if someone put together a
design document (perhaps on the wiki) and tried to enumerate at a high
level the logging requirements that
Robert Haas escribió:
On the other hand, I don't think this is the right way to do it. The
patch proposes the following mapping of logging destinations to GUCs:
stderr - log_line_prefix (same as now)
csvlog - not applicable (same as now)
syslog - syslog_line_prefix
eventlog -
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Robert Haas escribió:
On the other hand, I don't think this is the right way to do it. The
patch proposes the following mapping of logging destinations to GUCs:
stderr - log_line_prefix (same as now)
csvlog
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 09:43 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
Here is a patch to add a GUC parameter syslog_line_prefix.
It adds prefixes to syslog and eventlog. We still have
log_line_prefix, that will be used only for stderr logs.
We have a tip that log_line_prefix is not required for syslog
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 09:43 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
We have a tip that log_line_prefix is not required for syslog
in the documentation, but we'd better to have independent setttings
if we set log_destination to 'stderr, syslog'.
IMO we
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 21:19, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 09:43 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
We have a tip that log_line_prefix is not required for syslog
in the documentation, but we'd better to have independent
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I definitely want both text and CSV output - which I can't have today.
Sure you can. What makes you think you can't?
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 21:19, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 09:43 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
We have a tip that log_line_prefix is not
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:17, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I definitely want both text and CSV output - which I can't have today.
Sure you can. What makes you think you can't?
How do i do that? When I enable csv logging, it changes the log format
to
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:18, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Other than if you're logging all your queries (or over n time, where
n is very small), I've never seen a system with performance issues
from
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:17, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I definitely want both text and CSV output - which I can't have today.
Sure you can. What makes you think you can't?
How do i do that? When I enable
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
However, I don't think I actually believe the premise of this patch,
which is that sending log information to both stderr and syslog is
a useful thing to do
Actually the thing I want is to be able to send some stuff to syslog, and some
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:18, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
Other than if you're logging all your queries (or over n time, where
n
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
However, I don't think I actually believe the premise of this patch,
which is that sending log information to both stderr and syslog is
a useful thing to do
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:57, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:17, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I definitely want both text and CSV output - which I can't have today.
Sure you can. What
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 04:18:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I would even more like to have some things send to CSV and some things
sent to text.
This patch won't help, then.
No, it won't, but as said before, it lays the groundwork, namely letting the
syslogger know things about the log
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:57, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 22:17, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I definitely want
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 05:04:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
However, I don't think I actually believe the premise of this patch,
which is that sending log
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 04:18:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
I would even more like to have some things send to CSV and some things
sent to text.
This patch won't help, then.
No, it won't, but as said before, it lays
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 05:04:45PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 03:19:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
However, I don't think I actually believe the premise of this patch,
which is that sending log
Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com writes:
Having just sent two messages to the discussion about the wrong patch, I'll
apologize, and shut up now :)
No need to apologize --- this really is, and should be, all one
conversation. I think the main problem I've got with applying either
patch is that
Tom Lane wrote:
Joshua Tolley eggyk...@gmail.com writes:
Having just sent two messages to the discussion about the wrong patch, I'll
apologize, and shut up now :)
No need to apologize --- this really is, and should be, all one
conversation. I think the main problem I've got with
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I'm not sure I like this as a GUC. We're going to end up with a lot of
different GUCs, and everytime we add a new log destination (admittedly
not often, of course), that increases even
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I'm not sure I like this as a GUC. We're going to end up with a lot of
different GUCs, and everytime we add a new log destination (admittedly
not often, of course), that increases even further. And GUCs really
don't provide the level of flexibility you'd really like to
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 02:43, Itagaki Takahiro
itagaki.takah...@oss.ntt.co.jp wrote:
Here is a patch to add a GUC parameter syslog_line_prefix.
It adds prefixes to syslog and eventlog. We still have
log_line_prefix, that will be used only for stderr logs.
We have a tip that log_line_prefix
Here is a patch to add a GUC parameter syslog_line_prefix.
It adds prefixes to syslog and eventlog. We still have
log_line_prefix, that will be used only for stderr logs.
We have a tip that log_line_prefix is not required for syslog
in the documentation, but we'd better to have independent
45 matches
Mail list logo
