On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 04:55:30PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2018-11-30 19:53:18 +0100, David Fetter wrote: > >> This makes it much simpler for computers to use the logs while not > >> making it excessively difficult for humans to use them. > > > While perhaps not excessively so, I think it increases the difficulty > > sufficiently that I'm against such a proposal. > > I don't like this either. People who prefer CSV format can select it > trivially. Those who don't are going to be annoyed at us for changing > behavior that's stood for many years. > > Also, in addition to the objections you noted, there's the problem that > this change requires changing logging_collector to default to "on". > That's an *enormous* compatibility break, because of the effects on > where the log output goes. Not to mention having performance impacts > that can be significant. > > I think we should reject this out of hand.
It's been far too long since I got one of these! > > I think having a bin/pg_logparse tool that can parse postgres' config > > file and attempt to parse the log contents in whatever format they are > > would be much much more useful. Obviously not every log_line_prefix can > > be parsed unambiguously, but a lot of formats can, and a lot more > > formats can be made unambiguous (e.g. adding escape logic to application > > name logging would be very useful). > > Yeah, it might be possible to make some progress in those directions. So application names need better handling, and possibly reviews for security considerations, and pg_logparse ? OK. Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
