Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > However, I'm not real sure we need a flag. I think the use-case of > > wanting extra logging for a bgworker under development is unlikely to be > > satisfied very well by just causing existing start/stop logging messages > > to come out at higher priority. You're likely to be wanting to log other, > > bgworker-specific, events, and so you'll probably end up writing a bunch > > of your own elog calls anyway (which you'll eventually remove, #ifdef out, > > or decrease the log levels of). > > Yeah. So let's just change it. +1 -- 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
