Josh Berkus wrote:
> Guys:
>
> > That assumes we know what the shape of the log tables will be, but this
> > isn't quite clear to me - I can imagine it being different for different
> > needs. Having an external program to parse the logs into INSERT
> > statements would not be hard, anyway, so
I was thinking of outputing CREATE TABLE at the start of the log file.
I see what you mean that the schemas could be different, so we would
have to output the relevant fields all the time, like timestamp and
username, but because the username would be joined, you would only
output it on connectio
Guys:
> That assumes we know what the shape of the log tables will be, but this
> isn't quite clear to me - I can imagine it being different for different
> needs. Having an external program to parse the logs into INSERT
> statements would not be hard, anyway, so I'm not sure that this would
That assumes we know what the shape of the log tables will be, but this
isn't quite clear to me - I can imagine it being different for different
needs. Having an external program to parse the logs into INSERT
statements would not be hard, anyway, so I'm not sure that this would
buy us much. I'
ED]>
> >>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> pgsql-hackers list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Feature request -- Log Database Name
> >>
> &g
CTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
pgsql-hackers list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Feature request -- Log Database Name
Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think better would be
pgsql-hackers list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Feature request -- Log Database Name
>
> Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think better would be a GUC "log_to_table" which wrote all standard
> > out/err to a pg_log table
Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think better would be a GUC "log_to_table" which wrote all standard
> out/err to a pg_log table. of course, I doubt you could make this
> foolproof (how to log startup errors in this table?) but it could be a
> start.
How would a failed transaction mak
On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 11:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Also I was thinking that we could "hide" a log table into a "special"
> schema like this:
>
> CREATE TABLE log (
> when timestamp,
> user text,
> table name,
> query text,
> error text);
>
> So that iff this table exists in a databse, all
D]>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Feature request -- Log Database Name
>
> On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 11:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Also I was thinking that we could "hide" a log table into a "special"
> > schema like this:
> >
> > CREATE TABLE
PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Feature request -- Log Database Name
>
>
>
> --On Wednesday, July 23, 2003 16:20:20 -0400 Robert Treat
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Should it be a GUC like log_timestamp that can be applied to all log
> >
Josh Berkus wrote:
> TIm,
>
> > Anyways. If it doesn't already, having username and database would both be
> > helpful things when troubleshooting things.
>
> Hmmm ... that would be two log TODOs. I wonder why this has never come up
> before
What we recommend is to use log_pid and log_con
TIm,
> Anyways. If it doesn't already, having username and database would both be
> helpful things when troubleshooting things.
Hmmm ... that would be two log TODOs. I wonder why this has never come up
before
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
Robert,
> Should it be a GUC like log_timestamp that can be applied to all log
> messages?
Yes, absolutely.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
--On Wednesday, July 23, 2003 16:20:20 -0400 Robert Treat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Should it be a GUC like log_timestamp that can be applied to all log
messages?
IMHO, Yes, and it probably can be localized to elog(), although I haven't
looked
at the current elog() function code since 7.0 wh
On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 15:38, Larry Rosenman wrote:
>
>
> --On Wednesday, July 23, 2003 12:31:38 -0700 Josh Berkus
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hackers,
> >
> >
> >> Today, logs are all going to a file or syslog or both. But there is no
> >> way at all you can automatically know upon witch
--On Wednesday, July 23, 2003 12:31:38 -0700 Josh Berkus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hackers,
Today, logs are all going to a file or syslog or both. But there is no
way at all you can automatically know upon witch database errors are
thrown Therefore, would it be possible/hard to prefix all er
Hackers,
> Today, logs are all going to a file or syslog or both. But there is no way
> at all you can automatically know upon witch database errors are thrown
> Therefore, would it be possible/hard to prefix all error/warning message
> with the database name on witch it occured.
Olivier appears
18 matches
Mail list logo
