Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
Hmmm ... I don't see this as a problem. Just stick the whole message into
a single XML field. This is one area where XML is easier that SQL; since
it's a document format, it has no problem with a great big blob of text.
"Unstructured Data" and all that nonsense.
Then whatever utility the user uses to *read* the XML can parse the message
according to the user's desires. It'll still be an improvement over the
current format for log digestion, since it will become easy to separate
the message from the prefix and tag (which currently it's not).
This argument strikes me as nonsense. You've got a utility that's smart
enough to parse the very-free-format message bodies, but it's going to
be too confused by the log line prefix?
Not that Tom's dissent isn't enough, but I have to agree. It is very
easy to set up a parser for the log and XML is just going to add noise.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
