On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:47 PM Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can't speak for Nathan, but my reason would be that I'm not in the > habit to attach a debugger to my program to keep track of state > progression, but instead use elog() during patch development. I'm not > super stoked for getting my developmental elog(LOG)-s spammed with > stack traces, so I'd want to set this at least to ERROR, while in > production LOG could be fine. > > Similarly, there are probably extensions that do not use ereport() > directly, but instead use elog(), because of reasons like 'not > planning on doing translations' and 'elog() is the easier API'. > Forcing a change over to ereport because of stack trace spam in logs > caused by elog would be quite annoying.
That does seem like a fair complaint. But I also think it would be really good if we had something that could be enabled unconditionally instead of via a GUC... because if it's gated by aa GUC then it often won't be there when you need it. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
