Re: "unexpected EOF" messages

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

> > Would we consider adding such a switch (it should be easy enough to
> > do), or do we want to push this off to the mythical "let's improve the
> > logging subsystem" project that might eventually materialize if we're
> > lucky? Meaning - would people object to such a switch?
>
> Yes, if the new parameter allows a generic filter on multiple
> user-specified message types.
>

Are you answering the "Would we consider" or the "would people object"?