On Saturday 13 March 2004 09:36, Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Friday 12 March 2004 03:21 pm, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> > Lamar Owen wrote:
> > > Uh, we have many many many different ways to use syslog. So my other
> > > message on the topic.
> >
> > Which other message?
>
> The one I didn't post. :-)
>
> > Anyway, Syslog is not an option for us. We need flat files.
>
> Ok, riddle me this:
>
> If I have PostgreSQL set to log to syslog facility LOCAL0, and a
> local0.none on /var/log/messages and local0.* to /var/log/pgsql (assuming
> only one postmaster, unfortunately) then you get a flat file.
>
> I can see that in a multipostmaster setting how you might want some
> differentiation between postmasters, but ISTM that the tool reading these
> logs should be trained in how to separate loglines out. <snip>
Different postmasters = different conf files. Just set your syslog_facility
and/or your syslog_ident differently and it should be pretty easy to seperate
the logs. Actually, now that I have started using syslog fairly regularly, I
find it hard to believe it would be worth the effort to try to recreate a
logging facility as feature complete as syslog when we have syslog available.
ranks right up there with recreate cron, another feature many people think an
enterprise database "has to have". Personally I think in place upgrades are
far, far more important than either of those two, to both end users and to
the development community.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
