> So, I'm reading the slon documentation while waiting for stuff to
> compile and these things jump out at me.
>
> 1) Debug level lists 8 levels of logging as error through debug4 and
> then gives a numeric example. If it's a numeric log level, why aren't
> there numbers beside the text labels?
>
> Also, this disagrees with the run-time config docs which say that
> log_level can be from 0 to 4. The difference should be explained.

I'm quite sure I did revise that; perhaps it needs a few more words.

There are 8 levels; ERROR/WARN/CONFIG/INFO are ones that cannot be shut
off.  Your choices of log levels are 0 thru 4; at 0, only the
ERROR/WARN/CONFIG/INFO messages are shown.  At 1, DEBUG1 is added in.  At
2, DEBUG2 is added as well.  DEBUG4 will show all possible levels.

> 2) Debug level suggest a log level of 2 (WARN) and says this is "a
> routine, and, seemingly preferable choice". This is not what
> experience has demonstrated. As I recall we ran all logging at debug1
> since higher levels proved insufficient for troubleshooting. It seems
> reasonable to recommend debug1 for production systems where
> troubleshooting capabilities are required.

No, you're mis-recalling this.  DEBUG2 is the level we have always been
using.  Levels 3 and 4 show too much stuff; there's something at level 3
that spits out a line for each tuple that is replicated.

> 3) There is no listed default for the -c option (should be 3).

Perhaps I ought to add that...

> P.S. I went to www.slony1.info to see if I could find a bug reporting
> tool there, but no luck. I always used to just heckle Chris across the
> cubicles, but it's a little far to do that now.

And postcards are a bit slow for the purpose :-).  (Got it...)

Getting a new bug tracker is one of the subsequent steps.  There's a
Bugzilla instance that CommandPrompt set up to help with PostgreSQL; it
would be slick to add Slony-I to that.  That would probably make the
instance "in use," which I think it isn't, right now...