Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gKo2f-0002ga-I4 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:24:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gKo2e-0007Vc-53 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:24:28 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gKo2d-0007Qd-RR for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:24:27 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gKo2b-0005sp-Bn for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:24:26 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id wA8HOKxS019997; Thu, 8 Nov 2018 12:24:20 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: clemens@ladisch.de cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: BUG #15479: Documentation claims that client_min_messages is related to logging In-reply-to: <15479-ef0f4cc2fd995ca2@postgresql.org> References: <15479-ef0f4cc2fd995ca2@postgresql.org> Comments: In-reply-to =?utf-8?q?PG_Bug_reporting_form?= message dated "Thu, 01 Nov 2018 08:36:29 -0000" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <19995.1541697860.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 12:24:20 -0500 Message-ID: <19996.1541697860@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk =?utf-8?q?PG_Bug_reporting_form?= writes: > The problem is that client_min_messages has *no relation whatsoever* with > the server's logging. > This variable affects the client connection, so its documentation should be > moved into section 19.11 "Client Connection Behaviour". Yeah, I agree. Will do. > (And the word "messages" might still be misleading; maybe use "network > protocol messages".) I don't think that adds anything. regards, tom lane