>As to logfmt in particular, the fact that it's not standardized is probably a show-stopper. >Let's go with JSON.
I Agree. Though I don't want to deprecate the idea of logfmt enterly, yet. In container infrastructure it's a defacto standard and it solves a real problem. But I'm in favor to step back with that idea in favour of prioritizing JSON. El sáb., 14 abr. 2018, 11:03 a.m., David Arnold <dar@xoe.solutions> escribió: > >I'm dubious that JSON is "easier on machines" than CSV. > > Under common paradigms you are right, but if we talk of line-by-line > streaming with subsequent processing, then it's a show stopper. Of course, > some log aggregators have buffers for that and can do Multiline parsing on > that buffer, but > 1. Not all log aggregators support it > 2. Building a parser which reliably detects Multiline logs AND is easy on > resources is probably not something a normal person can achieve quickly. > > So normally CSV is fine but for log streaming it's not the best, nor the > most standard compliant way. > > El sáb., 14 abr. 2018, 10:51 a.m., Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> escribió: > >> David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: >> > I think a suite of json_to_* utilities would be a good bit more >> > helpful in this regard than changing our human-eye-consumable logs. We >> > already have human-eye-consumable logs by default. What we don't >> > have, and increasingly do want, is a log format that's really easy on >> > machines. >> >> I'm dubious that JSON is "easier on machines" than CSV. >> >> regards, tom lane >> >