Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> On 2020-Nov-23, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Here's a draft patch.

> Here's another of my own.  Outside of elog.c it seems identical.

Ah, I see I didn't cover the case in ProcSleep that you were originally on
about ... I'd just looked for existing references to log_min_messages
and client_min_messages.

I think it's important to have the explicit check for elevel >= ERROR.
I'm not too fussed about whether we invent is_log_level_output_client,
although that name doesn't seem well-chosen compared to
is_log_level_output.

Shall I press forward with this, or do you want to?

                        regards, tom lane


Reply via email to