Re: Logging (was Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion GRANT ALTER, TRIGGER ON ALTER)

2003-06-03 Thread Josh Berkus
Bruce,

> * Allow logging of only data definition(DDL), or DDL and modification
>   statements
>
> I can't see why someone would want to see only SELECT and not others,
> and I can't imagine wanting modification statements and not DDL.

This seems very reasonable to me.  David?

-- 
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Logging (was Re: [HACKERS] Suggestion GRANT ALTER, TRIGGER ON ALTER)

2003-06-03 Thread Bruce Momjian

Seems this would be the easiest way:

* Allow logging of only data definition(DDL), or DDL and modification
  statements

I can't see why someone would want to see only SELECT and not others,
and I can't imagine wanting modification statements and not DDL.

Added to TODO.

---

Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Actually, I can see that ... what about an option like "log_statement" which 
> > took an array of text which would correspond to the first part of the 
> > statement?  Then we could leave it up to the DBA do decide what they want to 
> > log, with the validation list being the base list of SQL statements, i.e.:
> 
> > log_statement = "CREATE TABLE, ALTER TABLE, CREATE VIEW, ALTER VIEW"
> 
> Strikes me as a tad unwieldy --- the useful cases would correspond to
> very long log_statement lists, and in every new release the list would
> change.  It's probably better to have a very small number of categories,
> something like
>   SELECT
>   INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE
>   all DDL
> and be able to flip logging on/off per category.  But we need to think
> about exactly what the categories are.
> 
> A related point that I've been meaning to bring up is that I'm not sure
> what sort of logging ought to happen in the new FE/BE protocol's
> PARSE/BIND/EXECUTE universe.  Right now, if you've got log_statement on,
> the strings fed to PARSE get logged.  But that's got precious little to
> do with what gets executed when, if the client is actually exploiting
> the opportunity to prepare statements in advance of execution.  On the
> other hand, I'm not sure we want three log entries for every command.
> Any thoughts on this out there?
> 
>   regards, tom lane
> 
> ---(end of broadcast)---
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian|  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |  (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 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html