Horton

Re: Add support for logging the current role

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>

View thread
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-01-15T02:59:41Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add support for an application_name parameter, which is displayed in

  2. Make CSV column ordering a bit more logical.

  3. Extend the format of CSV logs to include the additional information supplied

  4. Add virtual transaction IDs to CSVLOG output, so that messages coming from

  5. Provide for logfiles in machine readable CSV format. In consequence, rename


On 01/14/2011 09:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost<sfrost@snowman.net>  writes:
>> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>>> A user-settable column list seems pretty on-target
>>> for solving those problems to me.
>> I'm looking into implementing this.
>> An interesting initial question is- should the users be able to control
>> the *order* of the columns?  My gut feeling, if we're giving them a GUC
>> that's a list of fields, is 'yes', but I'm happy to listen to other
>> thoughts.
> Yeah, I was just thinking about that in connection with the suggestion
> of using a bitmap as the pre-parsed representation (which would more or
> less force adoption of the fixed-column-order approach).  I really think
> we can't get away with that.  Remember what Andrew pointed out upthread:
> it's important to be able to load the csvlog output directly into a
> table without any extra processing.  Suppose a DBA is logging columns
> A,B,D and he later realizes that logging C would be a good thing too.
> He's going to have to ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN to add C to his logging
> table ... and now it's at the end.  This is no problem if he can set the
> GUC to be "A,B,D,C" and have the field order be honored.  Otherwise he's
> got a problem.

Ok, you sold me. Until I read this I was inclined to say not, on KISS 
principles.


The only thing I'd suggest extra is that we might allow "version_n_m" as 
shorthand for the default table layout from the relevant version.

cheers

andrew