On 2021-05-13 18:36, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 2:57 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 2:44 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 for the idea. I did not read the complete patch but while reading
> through the patch, I noticed that you using elevel as LOG for printing
> the stack trace. But I think the backend whose pid you have passed,
> the connected client to that backend might not have superuser
> privileges and if you use elevel LOG then that message will be sent to
> that connected client as well and I don't think that is secure. So
> can we use LOG_SERVER_ONLY so that we can prevent
> it from sending to the client.
True, we should use LOG_SERVER_ONLY and not send any logs to the
client.
Thanks, agree with changing it to LOG_SERVER_ONLY.
I further tend to think that, is it correct to log queries with LOG
level when log_statement GUC is set? Or should it also be
LOG_SERVER_ONLY?
I feel it's OK to log with LOG_SERVER_ONLY since the log from
log_statement GUC would be printed already and independently.
ISTM people don't expect to log_statement GUC works even on
pg_log_current_plan(), do they?
Regards,
--
Atsushi Torikoshi
NTT DATA CORPORATION
