Re: elog(LOG), elog(DEBUG)

> Tom Lane writes:
> 
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > > There's a TODO item to make elog(LOG) a separate level.  I propose the
> > > name INFO.  It would be identical to DEBUG in effect, only with a
> > > different label.
> >
> > This conveys nothing to my mind.  How should I determine whether a given
> > elog call ought to use INFO or DEBUG?
> 
> DEBUG is for messages intended to help locating and analyzing faults in
> the source code (i.e., debugging).  Normal users don't need this during
> normal operation.
> 
> INFO (or whatever the name) is for messages that administrator's might be
> interested in for auditing and tuning.

Seems like a good idea.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026