Only specific tables. Of the 150 plus existing there are only 8 or 10 that hold sensitive data.
This will grow over time but will always be in the minority. -----Original Message----- From: Jim C. Nasby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:42 AM To: Hogan, James F. Jr. Cc: Tom Lane; Joshua D. Drake; josh@agliodbs.com; Andrew Dunstan; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] audit table containing Select statements submitted How do you hope to avoid this overhead when you're looking to track information on every single SELECT statement? Or were you looking to only log access to some specific tables? On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 09:38:54AM -0500, Hogan, James F. Jr. wrote: > Thank you all for the effort you put into response. > > The biggest thing I want to avoid isn't so much having to parse through > the log files but to avoid turning on such extensive logging altogether. > > I am not sure what kind of additional load logging to this extent may > add. > > Looks like I am not going to have much in the way of alternative. > > Maybe some day. > > Good news is that most access is via Web Interface and I capture most > activity that way. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
