Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: log_autovacuum

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum
Date: 2007-04-17 22:32:26
Message-ID: 15057.1176849146@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patchespgsql-www
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> BTW, shouldn't the log entry distinguish whether this was VACUUM,
>>> ANALYZE, or both?
>> 
>> We don't actually log anything for ANALYZE (the logging code is in
>> lazy_vacuum_rel).
>> 
>> Maybe it should be in autovacuum.c.

Actually, I had misunderstood where you were proposing to put this.
I believe that where you have it, the elapsed-time indication will
only cover the VACUUM step; so it's not relevant to this code whether
an ANALYZE would happen too.

My suggestion is that you add similar but independent logging to
analyze.c, controlled by the same min-duration variable.  So the
log output would treat autovac and autoanalyze as two independently
loggable operations.  I don't think there's much to print about
an autoanalyze except its runtime ... well, maybe you could print
the numbers of rows sampled and estimated, but I dunno if it matters.
The point of doing it is just to be able to track what the heck
autovacuum is doing ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-17 22:57:49
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-17 22:18:04
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-17 22:57:49
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-17 22:18:04
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group