Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3f2fe76d-071c-f929-4982-8642ae4f7be8@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box? (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/2/21 12:35 PM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > Le mer. 3 nov. 2021 à 00:18, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net > <mailto:andrew@dunslane.net>> a écrit : > > > On 11/2/21 12:09, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 8:55 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com > <mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> I think shipping with log_checkpoints=on and > >> log_autovacuum_min_duration=10m or so would be one of the best > things > >> we could possibly do to allow ex-post-facto troubleshooting of > >> system-wide performance issues. The idea that users care more about > >> the inconvenience of a handful of extra log messages than they do > >> about being able to find problems when they have them matches no > part > >> of my experience. I suspect that many users would be willing to > incur > >> *way more* useless log messages than those settings would ever > >> generate if it meant that they could actually find problems when and > >> if they have them. > > I fully agree. > > > /metoo > > > same here +1 -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: