Re: Allow auto_explain to log to NOTICE
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Allow auto_explain to log to NOTICE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 67101522-39d2-e302-92f1-b62b6d762a56@2ndQuadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Allow auto_explain to log to NOTICE (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
Ответы |
Re: Allow auto_explain to log to NOTICE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/17/2018 02:03 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 17 Jul 2018, at 19:11, Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >> On 07/17/2018 12:04 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> Since DEBUG is not a defined loglevel, it seems superfluous to include it here. >>> It’s also omitted from the documentation so it should probably be omitted from >>> here. >>> >>> + {"debug", DEBUG2, true}, >> I treated this like we do for client_min_messages and log_min_messages - the alias is there but I don;t think we documentit either. >> >> I don't mind removing it, was just trying to be consistent. It seems odd that we would accept it in one place but notanother. > Ooh.. I didn’t know that alias existed and didn’t find it when poking at the > code. In that case I agree with you, the alias should stay so I withdraw that > comment. I learned something new today =) Committed with the doc fix belatedly. >>>> I haven't added tests for auto_explain - I think that would be useful >>>> but it's a separate project. >>> Agreeing that this would be beneficial, the attached patch (to apply on top of >>> the patch in question) takes a stab at adding tests for this new functionality. >>> >>> In order to test plan output we need to support COSTS in the explain output, so >>> a new GUC auto_explain.log_costs is added. We also need to not print the >>> duration, so as a hack this patch omits the duration if auto_explain.log_timing >>> is set to off and auto_explain.log_analyze is set off. This is a hack and not >>> a nice overloading, but it seems overkill to add a separate GUC just to turn >>> off the duration, any better ideas on how support omitting the duration? >> Great, I'll check it out. > I’m not sure it’s worth adding this much to the code just to be able to test > it, but it seemed like a good excercise to write to have something to reason > about. > I think it probably is, buit I'm not very happy about the hack, so I didn't commit it. Please submit this to the next commitfest, possibly with a nicer way of managing the duration logging. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: