Excerpts from Stephen Frost's message of jue jun 30 18:35:40 -0400 2011: > > I know of no such list, and I think this field > > useful/important enough that people who are using csv logging would > > want it anyway. +1 on just tacking on the field and causing a flag day > > for csv users. > > Honestly, I think it was *me* who raised the issue that we don't have a > header for CSV logs and that it sucks for people using CSV files. We've > changed it in the past (application_name was added, iirc) and there > wasn't much noise of it that I recall. If everyone's happy with that, > it's fine by me.
I don't understand why it is so much a deal that 9.1 has a different CSV table definition than 9.0 anyway (or any two release combination). As long as both are clearly and correctly documented in the respective pages, it shouldn't be an issue at all. If anyone attempts to load CSV log files into the wrong table definition, the problem should make itself evident pretty quickly. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 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
