Re: Inconsistency in extended-query-protocol logging
От | Guillaume Smet |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Inconsistency in extended-query-protocol logging |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1d4e0c10609130815i71ec30d8i79c79f90496cfa25@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Inconsistency in extended-query-protocol logging (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Inconsistency in extended-query-protocol logging
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/13/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> writes: > > I attached a patch to improve the consistency. It adds statement: for > > every case. > > Isn't that just bloating the log? And weren't you the one complaining > about log volumes to begin with? As I told you, I don't care if we remove it or if we add it but having: statement: query -> duration: duration statement: query in one case and statement: query -> duration: duration query in the other case is not consistent. Either we remove statement: for extended protocol or we add it but I don't think it's a good idea to have a different behaviour between log_duration and log_min_duration_statement. As for bloating the log, it's already the case currently with regular queries so it won't change that much. At least in the cases we have here, it's negligible compared to the query text. IMHO, it's not an argument to choose either solution. IMHO, it's more logical to remove it as the text after statement: is not a statement in the extended query protocol case. I chose the other solution to be consistent with the choices Bruce made before. Regards, -- Guillaume
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: