Rafael Martinez <r.m.guerr...@usit.uio.no> writes: > If the behavior we are talking about is intentional, why do be have > pg_rotate_logfile() if we can not manually override with this function > log_rotation_age and log_rotation_size?
It works fine as long as the filename pattern is such that a new file would be selected. If we didn't have this filter, then a rotation operation would wipe out *current* log entries, even those that were made a millisecond ago. That can't possibly be a good idea. Any rotation scheme ought to provide for recent entries to survive at least until you've rotated through whichever other log files you have. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs