Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
Were are we on this? --- Andreas Pflug wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > > > >This has got portability issues (fopen("ab")) > > > My doc says b is ignored on ansi systems, and recommends using it. Do > you have other experience

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-11 Thread Andreas Pflug
Tom Lane wrote: This has got portability issues (fopen("ab")) My doc says b is ignored on ansi systems, and recommends using it. Do you have other experiences? and I don't care for its use of malloc in preference to palloc either. Do we already have an applicable memory context in the postmast

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The attached patch has the default filename issue fixed, and > > documentation. Since I don't have a doc build system functional, there > > might be tag mismatches or other typos; please check. IMHO this should > > be committed with

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-11 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The attached patch has the default filename issue fixed, and > documentation. Since I don't have a doc build system functional, there > might be tag mismatches or other typos; please check. IMHO this should > be committed without waiting for log rotati

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-11 Thread Andreas Pflug
Bruce Momjian wrote: I was thinking of close/reopen so log files could be rotated. Log file rotation is fine, if we find a consensus quite soon how to implement it... Seems as if I might find some time to implement it until feature freeze. The attached patch has the default filename issue fix

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Actually, my idea of sending a message to stderr saying we are using a > > pre-configured file is so folks aren't surprised by the fact they can't > > see any stderr anymore. > > Hm? I thought we'd just established that the patch was

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Actually, my idea of sending a message to stderr saying we are using a > pre-configured file is so folks aren't surprised by the fact they can't > see any stderr anymore. Hm? I thought we'd just established that the patch wasn't going to suppress output

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andreas Pflug wrote: > Sorry I didn't get back on this earlier, yesterday morning my internet > access was literally struck by lightning, I'm running temporary hardware > now. > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name > mentioned

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Andreas Pflug
Sorry I didn't get back on this earlier, yesterday morning my internet access was literally struck by lightning, I'm running temporary hardware now. Bruce Momjian wrote: Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name mentioned in postgresql.conf doesn't match the actual d

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andreas Pflug wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > >Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >>Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name > >>mentioned in postgresql.conf doesn't match the actual default. > >> > >> > > > >I'm really not happy with the concept t

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-10 Thread Andreas Pflug
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name mentioned in postgresql.conf doesn't match the actual default. I'm really not happy with the concept that the postmaster overrides its stderr direction. I agre

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name > mentioned in postgresql.conf doesn't match the actual default. I'm really not happy with the concept that the postmaster overrides its stderr direction. reg

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Oh, it would need doc additions. I can do that when I apply, or you can resubmit. --- Andreas Pflug wrote: > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > >Specifically about the logs, I still think there is a lot of value to > >being able t

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-09 Thread Bruce Momjian
Looks good to me. The only issue I saw was that the default file name mentioned in postgresql.conf doesn't match the actual default. Is this ready to be added to the patch queue? --- Andreas Pflug wrote: > Magnus Hagander

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] serverlog function (log_destination file)

2004-06-08 Thread Andreas Pflug
Magnus Hagander wrote: Specifically about the logs, I still think there is a lot of value to being able to read the logs remotely even if you can't restart postmaster. Since I believe that retrieving the logs easily without server file access is a feature that's welcomed by many users, here's my p