Tom Lane escribió: > [ please trim the quoted material a bit, folks ] > > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > 2009/9/28 Robert Haas <robertmh...@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. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
