On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Stephen Frost 2016-10-12 <20161012190732.gj13...@tamriel.snowman.net>
>> For my 2c, I'd rather have %m, but I definitely agree with Robert that
>> we need to do *something* here and if the only thing holding us back is
>> %t vs. %m, then
Re: Stephen Frost 2016-10-12 <20161012190732.gj13...@tamriel.snowman.net>
> For my 2c, I'd rather have %m, but I definitely agree with Robert that
> we need to do *something* here and if the only thing holding us back is
> %t vs. %m, then let's just pick one and move on. I'll just hold my nose
> w
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/12/16 11:58 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > (Yes, the '' default might be fine for syslog, but I don't think
> > that's a good argument for sticking with it for default installs. I've
> > seen way too many useless log files out there, and at worst we'll have
> > syslog
On 10/12/16 11:58 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> (Yes, the '' default might be fine for syslog, but I don't think
> that's a good argument for sticking with it for default installs. I've
> seen way too many useless log files out there, and at worst we'll have
> syslogs with two timestamps.)
We'd have
On 10/12/16 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> There would be some value in the complexity you're thinking of for
> installations that log to multiple targets concurrently, but really,
> who does that?
I see that a lot.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > Re: Jeff Janes 2016-10-12
> >
> >> Do you think the pushback will come from people who just accept the
> >> defaults?
> >
> > I'm concerned about readability. "2016-10-12 20:14:30.449 CEST"
Hi,
On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 13:11 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > What is the cost of using %m, other than 4 (rather compressible) bytes per
> > log entry?
>
> More log I/O, which is not free ...
FWIW, we've been setting log_line_prefix to '< %m > ' for quite a long time in
PGDG RPMs, and did not get
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Jeff Janes 2016-10-12
>
>> Do you think the pushback will come from people who just accept the
>> defaults?
>
> I'm concerned about readability. "2016-10-12 20:14:30.449 CEST" is a
> lot of digits. My eyes can parse "20:14:30" as a ti
Re: Jeff Janes 2016-10-12
> Do you think the pushback will come from people who just accept the
> defaults?
I'm concerned about readability. "2016-10-12 20:14:30.449 CEST" is a
lot of digits. My eyes can parse "20:14:30" as a timestamp, but
"20:14:30.449" looks more like an IP address. (Admitted
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Janes writes:
> > On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> >> Patch attached. (Still using %t, I don't think %m makes sense for the
> >> default.)
>
> > What is the cost of using %m, other than 4 (rather compressible) bytes
Jeff Janes writes:
> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:
>> Patch attached. (Still using %t, I don't think %m makes sense for the
>> default.)
> What is the cost of using %m, other than 4 (rather compressible) bytes per
> log entry?
More log I/O, which is not free ... and that
On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Tom Lane 2016-09-29 <18642.1475159...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> > > Possibly the longer version could be added as an example in the
> > > documentation.
> >
> > I suspect that simply having a nonempty default in the first place
> > is going to do
Re: Peter Eisentraut 2016-10-12
<0caa6d7f-deb6-9a43-2b38-60e63af93...@2ndquadrant.com>
> >> > is going to do more to raise peoples' awareness than anything we
> >> > could do in the documentation. But perhaps an example along these
> >> > lines would be useful for showing proper use of %q.
> > Pa
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> That still doesn't address what to do about syslog and eventlog users.
> We would need either a separate prefix setting for those, or maybe
> something like %q that says, skip to here if using syslog. (I don't
> know eventlog, so I don't know if a common setting for sys
On 10/2/16 4:20 PM, Christoph Berg wrote:
>> I suspect that simply having a nonempty default in the first place
>> > is going to do more to raise peoples' awareness than anything we
>> > could do in the documentation. But perhaps an example along these
>> > lines would be useful for showing proper
Re: Tom Lane 2016-09-29 <18642.1475159...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> > Possibly the longer version could be added as an example in the
> > documentation.
>
> I suspect that simply having a nonempty default in the first place
> is going to do more to raise peoples' awareness than anything we
> could do in th
16 matches
Mail list logo
