Re: Logging pg_autovacuum
От | Matthew T. O'Connor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Logging pg_autovacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4451078C.5010809@zeut.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Logging pg_autovacuum (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Logging pg_autovacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I think there are two things people typically want to know from the logs: 1) Is autovacuum running 2) Did autovacuum take action (issue a VACUUM or ANALYZE) I don't think we need mention the name of each and every database we touch, we can, but it should be at a lower level like DEBUG1 or something. I don't know what logging level these thing should go at, but I for one would like them to be fairly high easy to get to, perhaps NOTICE? Matt Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian) writes: >>> Change log message about vacuuming database name from LOG to DEBUG1. >>> Prevents duplicate meaningless log messsages. >> Could we have some discussion about this sort of thing, rather than >> unilateral actions? >> >> Those messages were at LOG level because otherwise it's difficult to be >> sure from the log that autovac is running at all. > > OK, so what do we want to do? Clearly outputing something everytime > pg_autovacuum touches a database isn't ideal. By default, the server > logs should show significant events, which this is not. > > Do we want something output only the first time autovacuum runs? >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: