Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> David Steele wrote:
>> On 3/29/16 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Repurposing COMMERROR is definitely starting to seem like a low-impact
>>> solution compared to these others. Under what circumstances would you
>>> be wanting hide-from-client with an elevel different from LOG, anyway?
> So audit records would use COMMERROR? That sounds really bad to me.
My proposal would be to invent a new elevel macro, maybe LOG_ONLY,
for this purpose. But under the hood it'd be the same as COMMERROR.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
