Re: log_autovacuum

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum
Date: 2007-08-03 19:59:15
Message-ID: 1186171155.4136.3.camel@ebony.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 12:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Gregory Stark wrote:
> >> Could I suggest renaming log_autovacuum to log_autovacuum_min_duration?
>
> > Sure, whatever makes the most sense. In fact min_duration would be more
> > consistent.
>
> I'm not sure I believe Greg's argument about needing more autovac
> logging parameters, but since this one acts just like
> log_min_duration_statement, I concur with renaming it.

log_min_duration_autovacuum

makes the most sense in comparison, IMHO.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-08-03 20:07:56 Re: "smart" shutdown is broken in HEAD
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-08-03 18:35:06 Re: "smart" shutdown is broken in HEAD