Does anyone want to keep elog(NOIND)?  It's not used anywhere, and I think
the notion of indentation levels, while kind of obsolete with syslog
anyway, should not be part of the elog API.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net   http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter


Wed, 6 Jun 2001 19:28:01 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
elog(NOIND)?
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Does anyone want to keep elog(NOIND)?  It's not used anywhere, and I think
> the notion of indentation levels, while kind of obsolete with syslog
> anyway, should not be part of the elog API.

Nuke it.

While you're at it, rearrange the numeric order of the elog levels to be
sensible.  There are some bizarrely-coded tests in elog.c that could be
simplified if severity levels had the obvious ordering.

			regards, tom lane

Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:03:28 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: elog(NOIND)? 
Tom Lane writes:

> While you're at it, rearrange the numeric order of the elog levels to be
> sensible.  There are some bizarrely-coded tests in elog.c that could be
> simplified if severity levels had the obvious ordering.

Okay, but I'm not sure there will be a total ordering forever.  For
example, it's pretty useless to log user-level errors like "syntax error"
to the server log by default.  There needs to be more flexibility.

Does anyone foresee a problem with making them an enum?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net   http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter


Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:40:08 +0200 (CEST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: elog(NOIND)? 