Re: "unexpected EOF" messages

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Vik Reykja <vikreykja@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Would we consider adding such a switch (it should be easy enough to
>> > do), or do we want to push this off to the mythical "let's improve the
>> > logging subsystem" project that might eventually materialize if we're
>> > lucky? Meaning - would people object to such a switch?
>>
>> Yes, if the new parameter allows a generic filter on multiple
>> user-specified message types.
>
>
> Are you answering the "Would we consider" or the "would people object"?

Oh, nice catch - I guess my phrasing of those two questions was really stupid :)

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/