Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 55D9E656.7030701@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PATCH: numeric timestamp in log_line_prefix (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/23/2015 09:28 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > >>>> 1) fix the docs (explicitly say that it's a Unix epoch) >>> >>> I would add the word "numeric" in front of timestamp both in the doc and >>> in the postgresql.conf.sample, as it justifies the chosen %n. >> >> I think we're already using 'unix epoch' in the docs without >> explicitly stating that it's a numeric value, so I don't think we >> should use it here as it'd be inconsistent. > > The point was to justify the choice of 'n' somehow. > >>>> 2) handle 'padding' properly >> >> Hmmm, I'm not entirely sure how exactly the padding is supposed to >> work (IIRC I've never used it), and I thought it behaved correctly. >> But maybe not - I think the safest thing is copy what 't' does, so >> I've done that in attached v3 of the patch. > > Ok. Version 3 applies and compiles, and padding now works as expected. > > Here is a v4 that I also tested, and where I just removed a spurious '.' > in the millisecond format. Thanks for spotting that. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: