Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> This week, we heard about a user willing to use a custom timestamp > >> format across a set of services to improve the debugability of the > >> whole set, Postgres being one of them. Unfortunately datestyle does > >> not take into account the logs. Would it be worth adding a new GUC > >> able to control the timestamp format in the logs? > > > A separate GUC seems kind of weird. Wouldn't it be better with something > > like %(format)t or such in the log_line_prefix itself in that case? That > > could also be expanded to other parameters, should we need them? > > TBH, my answer to the rhetorical question is "no". There is nothing > weird about the timestamps %t emits now, and no reason why they should > need to be configurable, except that somebody thinks it's easier to > lobby us to complicate our software than to fix whatever they have that > can't consume standard timestamp format.
I imagine pgBadger/pgFouine wouldn't be happy with the timestamp being infinitely configurable. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
