Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > Simon Riggs wrote: >> I'm particularly concerned that people make such changes too quickly. >> There are many things in this area of code that need changing, but also >> many more that do not. If we are to move forwards we need to avoid going >> one step forwards, one step back.
> There were enough people who wanted a change that we went ahead and did > it --- if there was lack of agreement, we would have delayed longer. The real reason why we changed this is that nobody (except Simon) sees a situation where unconditional logging of successful replication connections is especially helpful. If you were trying to diagnose a problem you would more likely need to know about *failed* connections, but the code that was in there didn't provide that. At least not unless you turned on log_connections ... regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers