Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
От | Gilles Darold |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6336d5dc-ad3d-84df-7eeb-01c6b391298e@dalibo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function ("Karl O. Pinc" <kop@meme.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function
Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Le 29/10/2016 à 14:38, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:03:37 +0200 > Gilles Darold <gilles.darold@dalibo.com> wrote: > >> ... >> v9 of the patch, attached here. > Attached are 2 more documentation patchs to apply on > top of your v9 patch. > > > patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_current_logfiles > > Explains the current_logfiles file in the > narrative documentation. It's not like I want > to toot our horn here. I'm afraid that otherwise > no one will notice the feature. > > > patch_pg_current_logfile-v9.diff.doc_indexes > > Fixes an index entry and add more. > > Regards, > > Karl <kop@meme.com> > Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." > -- Robert A. Heinlein The attached v10 of the current_logfiles patch include your last changes on documentation but not the patch on v9 about the user-supplied GUC value. I think the v10 path is ready for committers and that the additional patch to add src/include/utils/guc_values.h to define user GUC values is something that need to be taken outside this one. Imo, thoses GUC values (stderr, csvlog) are not expected to change so often to require a global definition, but why not, if committers think this must be done I can add it to a v11 patch. Best regards, -- Gilles Darold Consultant PostgreSQL http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: