Re: syslog_line_prefix
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: syslog_line_prefix |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f070909281010t6973ffe5w6d0a0a0811f3aeea@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: syslog_line_prefix (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: syslog_line_prefix
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Tom Lane escribió: >> [ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ] >> >> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> > 2009/9/28 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>: >> >> The problem with having the syslogger send the data directly to an >> >> external process is that the external process might be unable to >> >> process the data as fast as syslogger is sending it. I'm not sure >> >> exactly what will happen in that case, but it will definitely be bad. >> >> This is the same issue already raised with respect to syslog versus >> syslogger, ie, some people would rather lose log data than have the >> backends block waiting for it to be written. > > That could be made configurable; i.e. let the user choose whether to > lose messages or to make everybody wait. I think the behavior I was proposing was neither "drop" nor "wait", but "buffer". Not sure how people feel about that. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: