On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:08 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:51
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:08 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
Did anyone actually test
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
Did anyone actually test this patch? :)
I admit I did not build it on Windows specifically because I assumed
that was done as part of the
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
Did anyone actually test this patch? :)
I admit I did not build it on Windows specifically because
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:01 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
So as a conclusion, the left over items to be handled for patch are:
1. Remove the new usage related to use of same event source name
for registration from pgevent.
2. Document the
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:01 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
So as a conclusion, the left over items to be handled for patch are:
1. Remove the new usage related to
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
Did anyone actually test this patch? :)
I admit I did not build it on Windows specifically because I assumed
that was done as part of the development and review. And the changes
to pg_event.c can never have built,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 8:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Well, it does in a couple of places. I'm nto sure it's that important
(as nobody has AFAIK ever requested
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
There's also the change to throw an error if the source is already
registered, which is potentially a bigger problem.
I think generally if
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
There's also the change to throw an error if the source is
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Amit Kapila
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
There's also the change to throw an error if the source is already
registered, which is potentially a bigger problem. Since the default
will be the same everywhere, do we really want to throw an error when
you install a second version, now that this is
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
So as a conclusion, the left over items to be handled for patch are:
1. Remove the new usage related to use of same event source name
for registration from pgevent.
2. Document the information to prevent loss of messages in some
scenarios as explained
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 4:10 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
I think it's bit late for this patch for 9.4, you might want to move it to
next CF.
Thanks, I've moved it. It's a regret that this very small patch wasn't put
in 9.4.
i took a
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Is there a reason for there still being changes in guc.c, pgevent.c
etc? Shouldn't it all be confined to pg_ctl now? That's my
understanding from the thread that that's the only part we care about.
Yes, strictly speaking, those are useful for the
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 4:01 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Is there a reason for there still being changes in guc.c, pgevent.c
etc? Shouldn't it all be confined to pg_ctl now? That's my
understanding from the thread that that's the only part
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Well, it does in a couple of places. I'm nto sure it's that important
(as nobody has AFAIK ever requested that change from for example EDB),
but it's not a bad thing. However, with a hardcoded service name, I
think the changes to pg_event.c are probably
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 8:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Well, it does in a couple of places. I'm nto sure it's that important
(as nobody has AFAIK ever requested that change from for example EDB),
but it's not a bad thing.
I think this is
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
I think it's bit late for this patch for 9.4, you might want to move it to
next CF.
Thanks, I've moved it. It's a regret that this very small patch wasn't put
in 9.4.
Regards
MauMau
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
I rebased the patch to HEAD and removed the compilation error on Linux. I
made event_source variable on all platforms like register_servicename,
although they are not necessary on non-Windows platforms.
I have verified that
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Only one minor suggestion:
+Name of the event source for pg_ctl to use for event log. The
+default is PostgreSQL.
From this description, it is not clear when the event log will be used
in pg_ctl. For example, if user uses -e option
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 5:21 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Currently -e option is accepted with all the options that can be provided
in pg_ctl. Shouldn't we accept it only with options related to service,
because that is only when it will be
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Currently -e option is accepted with all the options that can be provided
in pg_ctl. Shouldn't we accept it only with options related to service,
because that is only when it will be used. Basically write_stderr() will
write to event log only incase of
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:21 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, Amit san, Tom san,
I'm sorry for my late response. I've just caught up with the discussion.
I'm almost convinced.
Please find attached the revised patch. I'd like to follow the idea of
adding a switch to pg_ctl.
Hello, Amit san, Tom san,
I'm sorry for my late response. I've just caught up with the discussion.
I'm almost convinced.
Please find attached the revised patch. I'd like to follow the idea of
adding a switch to pg_ctl. The newly added -e event_source sets the
event source name for pg_ctl
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
AFAICS, pg_ctl already reports to stderr if stderr is a tty. This whole
issue only comes up when pg_ctl itself is
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
How's that going to work during pg_ctl stop? There's no -o switch
provided.
As there's no -o switch, so there won't be problem of getting wrong event
source name from server due to
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So basically, I think having pg_ctl try to do what this patch proposes
is a bad idea.
I'm not a Windows person either, but I tend to agree. I can't think
that this is going to be very robust ... and if it's not going to be
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
Are you concerned about the case when user passes event_source name
in command line at the time of start:
pg_ctl start -o -c event_source=PG9.4 -D data_dir
Right.
If my
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com writes:
[ pg_ctl_eventsrc_v6.patch ]
I looked at this patch a bit. As a non-Windows person I have no intention
of being the committer, since I can't test the Windows-specific changes.
However, I do
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
Are you concerned about the case when user passes event_source name
in command line at the time of start:
pg_ctl start -o -c event_source=PG9.4 -D data_dir
Right.
If my understanding is right about your concern, then I think it will consider
the
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com writes:
[ pg_ctl_eventsrc_v6.patch ]
I looked at this patch a bit. As a non-Windows person I have no intention
of being the committer, since I can't test the Windows-specific changes.
However, I do want to object to the business about having pg_ctl use
postgres -C to
From: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
MauMau escribió:
The raw link only gave the mail in text format. I hoped to import
the mail into Windows Mail on Windows Vista, but I couldn't.
You might need to run a conversion process by which you transform the
raw file (in mbox format) into
From: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
MauMau escribió:
Do you know how I can reply to an email which was deleted locally?
I thought I could download an old mail by clicking raw link and
import it to the mailer. However, it requires username/password
input, and it seems to be different
MauMau escribió:
The raw link only gave the mail in text format. I hoped to import
the mail into Windows Mail on Windows Vista, but I couldn't.
You might need to run a conversion process by which you transform the
raw file (in mbox format) into EML format or whatever it is that Windows
Mail
MauMau escribió:
Hi, Amit san,
I'm replying to your previous email. I wanted to reply to your
latest mail below, but I removed it from my mailer by mistake.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LAg6ndZdWLb5e=Ep5DzcE8KZU=JbmO+tFwySYHm2ja=q...@mail.gmail.com
Do you know how I can
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
If I understand correctly that objection was on changing Default Event
Source name, and the patch now doesn't contain that change, it's
just a bug fix for letting pg_ctl know the non-default event source
set by user.
Please clarify if I misunderstood
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 2:39 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
If I understand correctly that objection was on changing Default Event
Source name, and the patch now doesn't contain that change, it's
just a bug fix for letting pg_ctl know the
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's just a very minor coding style thing, so I am marking this
patch as
Ready For Committer.
I could see that this patch has been
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's just a very minor coding style thing, so I am marking this patch
as
Ready For Committer.
I could see that this patch has been marked as Needs Review in CF app.
suggesting that it should be rejected based
Hi, Amit san,
I'm replying to your previous email. I wanted to reply to your latest mail
below, but I removed it from my mailer by mistake.
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1LAg6ndZdWLb5e=Ep5DzcE8KZU=JbmO+tFwySYHm2ja=q...@mail.gmail.com
Do you know how I can reply to an email
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:20 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Amit san,
I'm replying to your previous email. I wanted to reply to your latest mail
below, but I removed it from my mailer by mistake.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 4:38 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
How about below message:
event source event_source_name is already registered.
OK, I added several lines for this. Please check the attached patch.
It gives the proper message, but even after error, the second message
box
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I mean, if
there's a GUC that controls the event source name, then it can be
changed between
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
To proceed with the review of this patch, I need to know about
whether appending version number or any
From: MauMau maumau...@gmail.com
OK, I added several lines for this. Please check the attached patch.
I'm sorry, I attached the old patch as v5 in my previous mail. Attached on
this mail is the correct one.
I'll update the CommitFest entry soon.
Regards
MauMau
pg_ctl_eventsrc_v5.patch
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So? Anything which can know the value of a GUC parameter can certainly
know the selected port number.
1. In
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So? Anything which can know the
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
How about below message:
event source event_source_name is already registered.
OK, I added several lines for this. Please check the attached patch.
What I had in mind was to change it during initdb, we are already doing it
for some other parameter
On 1/23/14, 4:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Why wouldn't that be necessary with your approach, too? I mean, if
there's a GUC that controls the event source name, then it can be
changed between restarts, regardless of what you call it.
I don't know if it's practical, but the logical conclusion
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On 1/23/14, 4:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Why wouldn't that be necessary with your approach, too? I mean, if
there's a GUC that controls the event source name, then it can be
changed between restarts, regardless of what you call it.
I don't know if
Tom Lane escribió:
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes:
On 1/23/14, 4:08 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
Why wouldn't that be necessary with your approach, too? I mean, if
there's a GUC that controls the event source name, then it can be
changed between restarts, regardless of what you call
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Tom Lane escribió:
That particular ID would be a horrid choice, because we don't try very
hard to ensure it's unique. In particular, a standby server on the same
machine as the master (not an uncommon case, at least for testing
purposes) would
From: Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
I'm still not clear on why we can't just use the port number.
It will be possible to use port to set the default value of event_source GUC
when starting postmaster. But using port during event source registration
will involve much more.
To use port, we have
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com writes:
From: Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
I'm still not clear on why we can't just use the port number.
To use port, we have to tell the location of $PGDATA to regsvr32.exe.
[ scratches head... ] Exactly which of the other proposals *doesn't*
require that?
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:03
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 4:22 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
MauMau maumau...@gmail.com writes:
From: Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
I'm still not clear on why we can't just use the port number.
To use port, we have to tell the location of $PGDATA to regsvr32.exe.
[ scratches head... ]
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
To follow this, we have the line as:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if the port number wouldn't be a better choice. And that
could even be done without adding a parameter.
We need this for register of event source which might be done
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if the port number wouldn't be a better choice. And that
could even be done without adding a
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:03 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
So? Anything which can know the value of a GUC parameter can certainly
know the selected port number.
1. In case of registration of event source, either user has to pass the name
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
How about below message:
event source event_source_name is already registered.
Thanks. I'll use this, making the initial letter the capital E like other
messages in the same source file. I'm going to submit the final patch and
update the
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Today, I reviewed the patch again and found it okay, except a small
inconsistency which is about default event source name in
postgresql.conf, all other places it's changed except in
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
To follow this, we have the line as:
#event_source = 'PostgreSQL 9.4'
But this requires us to change this line for each major release. That's a
maintenance headache.
What I
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
To follow this, we have the line as:
#event_source = 'PostgreSQL 9.4'
But this requires us to change this line
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Do you think without this the problem reported by you is resolved
completely.
User can hit same problem, if he tries to follow similar steps mentioned
in
your first mail. I had tried below steps based on description in your
first mail:
If user
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:38 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Do you think without this the problem reported by you is resolved
completely.
User can hit same problem, if he tries to follow similar steps mentioned
in
your first mail. I had
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:54 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I've removed a limitation regarding event log on Windows with the attached
patch. I hesitate to admit this is a bug fix and want to regard this an
improvement, but maybe it's a bug fix from users' perspective.
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Today, I was trying to reproduce this issue and found that if user tries
to register event source second time with same name, we just replace
the previous event source's path in registry.
Shouldn't we try to stop user at this step only, means if he tries
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:05 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Today, I was trying to reproduce this issue and found that if user tries
to register event source second time with same name, we just replace
the previous event source's path in
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:26 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Few other points:
-
1.
#ifdef WIN32
/* Get event source from postgresql.conf for eventlog output */
get_config_value(event_source, event_source,
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Few other points:
-
1.
#ifdef WIN32
/* Get event source from postgresql.conf for eventlog output */
get_config_value(event_source, event_source, sizeof(event_source));
#endif
event logging is done for both win32 and cygwin env.
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Few minor things:
1.
evtHandle = RegisterEventSource(NULL,
*event_source? event_source: DEFAULT_EVENT_SOURCE);
In this code, you are trying to access the value (*event_source) and
incase it is not initialised,
it will not contain the value and could
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
Few minor things:
event_source here is a global static char array, so it's automatically
initialized with zeros and safe to access.
Right, I had missed that point.
2. minor
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:43 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Amit san,
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
[elog.c]
Writing the default value in this file was redundant, because
event_source
cannot be NULL. So change
I think this change might not be safe as
Hi, Amit san,
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
[elog.c]
Writing the default value in this file was redundant, because
event_source
cannot be NULL. So change
I think this change might not be safe as write_eventlog() gets called
from write_stderr() which might get called
before
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
I think it is better to keep it like what I suggested above,
because in that case
it will assign default name even if postgres -C fails due to some
reason.
2. What will happen if user doesn't change the name in event_source
or kept the same name,
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:31 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
I re-considered that. As you suggested, I think I'll do as follows. Would
this be OK?
[pg_ctl.c]
evtHandle = RegisterEventSource(NULL, *event_source ? event_source :
PostgreSQL
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
1. isn't it better to handle as it is done in write_eventlog() which
means if string is empty then
use PostgreSQL.
evtHandle = RegisterEventSource(NULL, event_source ? event_source :
PostgreSQL);
Thank you for reviewing. Yes, I did so with the
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 5:52 PM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
1. isn't it better to handle as it is done in write_eventlog() which
means if string is empty then
use PostgreSQL.
evtHandle = RegisterEventSource(NULL, event_source ? event_source
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:41 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: MauMau maumau...@gmail.com
I've removed a limitation regarding event log on Windows with the attached
patch. I hesitate to admit this is a bug fix and want to regard this an
improvement, but maybe it's a bug fix from
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Not having looked at it in detail yet, but this seems to completely remove
the default value. What happens if the error that needs to be logged is
the
one saying that it couldn't exec postgres to find out the value in the
config file? AFAICT it's going
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:25 AM, MauMau maumau...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
Not having looked at it in detail yet, but this seems to completely remove
the default value. What happens if the error that needs to be logged is
the
one saying that it couldn't exec
From: MauMau maumau...@gmail.com
I've removed a limitation regarding event log on Windows with the attached
patch. I hesitate to admit this is a bug fix and want to regard this an
improvement, but maybe it's a bug fix from users' perspective. Actually,
I
received problem reports from some
86 matches
Mail list logo
