Re: Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52A0C734.2050703@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log? ("MauMau" <maumau307@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [RFC] Shouldn't we remove annoying FATAL messages from server log?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/05/2013 10:21 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * David Johnston (polobo@yahoo.com) wrote: >> ISTM that instituting some level of categorization for messages would be >> helpful. Then logging and reporting frameworks would be able to identify >> and segregate the logs in whatever way they and the configuration deems >> appropriate. > > I've wanted to do that and have even discussed it with folks in the > past, the trick is finding enough toit's, which is difficult when you > start to look at the size of the task... But ... if we set a firm policy on this, then we could gradually clean up the error messages piecemeal over the next couple of major versions.We could also make sure that any new features compliedwith the categorization policy. Right now, how to categorize errors is up to each individual patch author, which means that things are all over the place, and get worse with each new feature added. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: