
> Maybe I have the ordering wrong for server_min_messages.  Perhaps it
> should be:
> 
> 	DEBUG5-1, INFO, NOTICE/WARNING, ERROR, LOG, FATAL, PANIC
> 
> Nothing prevents us from doing that.  Well, anyway, not sure how much I
> like it but I throw it out as an idea.

Ah, yes, that sounds optimal to me. 

Andreas

Fri, 1 Mar 2002 20:05:19 +0100
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>
Re: elog() patch
Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> 
> > Maybe I have the ordering wrong for server_min_messages.  Perhaps it
> > should be:
> > 
> > 	DEBUG5-1, INFO, NOTICE/WARNING, ERROR, LOG, FATAL, PANIC
> > 
> > Nothing prevents us from doing that.  Well, anyway, not sure how much I
> > like it but I throw it out as an idea.
> 
> Ah, yes, that sounds optimal to me. 

What do others think of this.  I can easily do it.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:42:04 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: elog() patch
Bruce Momjian writes:

> Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe I have the ordering wrong for server_min_messages.  Perhaps it
> > > should be:
> > >
> > > 	DEBUG5-1, INFO, NOTICE/WARNING, ERROR, LOG, FATAL, PANIC
> > >
> > > Nothing prevents us from doing that.  Well, anyway, not sure how much I
> > > like it but I throw it out as an idea.
> >
> > Ah, yes, that sounds optimal to me.
>
> What do others think of this.  I can easily do it.

I'd rather keep NOTICE instead of WARNING.  It's just to keep things
looking familiar a bit.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net


Fri, 1 Mar 2002 22:21:22 -0500 (EST)
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Re: elog() patch