Tom Lane wrote:
> A less dangerous way of approaching it might be to have an option
> whereby the postmaster invokes 'uptime' via system() every so often
> (maybe once a minute?) and throttles on the basis of the results.
> The reaction time would be poorer, but security would be a whole lot
> be
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> It has been brought up that elog should be able to automatically fill in
> the file, line, and perhaps the function name where it's called, to avoid
> having to prefix each message with the function name by hand, which is
> quite ugly.
>
> This is doable, but it requi
