On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:25 PM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote: > I think you mean DEBUG1? It's already at DEBUG2. > > I considered using DEBUG1 but decided against it. The other exclusions > will produce a limited amount of output because there are only a few of > them. In the case of unlogged tables there could be any number of > exclusions and I thought that was too noisy for DEBUG1.
+1. Even DEBUG2 seems pretty chatty for a message that just tells you that something is working in an entirely expected fashion; consider DEBUG3. Fortunately, base backups are not so common that this should cause enormous log spam either way, but keeping the amount of debug output down to a reasonable level is an important goal. Before a43f1939d5dcd02f4df1604a68392332168e4be0, it wasn't really practical to run a production server with log_min_messages lower than DEBUG2, because you'd get so much log spam it would cause performance problems (and maybe fill up the disk). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
