Re: log_duration is redundant, no?

From: "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: log_duration is redundant, no?
Date: 2006-09-16 11:56:35
Message-ID: 1d4e0c10609160456q7ae43357tb19b358b71b2fba5@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 9/16/06, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> It might make sense to log _what_ is going on, without telling all the
> little details, for example
>
> LOG: parse duration: 0.250 ms
> LOG: bind duration: 0.057 ms
> LOG: execute my_query: SELECT * FROM shop WHERE $1 = $2
> DETAIL: parameters: $1 = 'Clothes Clothes Clothes', $2 = 'Joe''s Widgets'

It's not really the idea when you use log_statement and log_duration.
Lines are completely different semantically speaking.
So you should have:
LOG: parse (log_statement)
LOG: duration: 0.250 ms (log_duration)

--
Guillaume

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2006-09-16 12:00:37 Re: [PATCHES] Include file in regress.c
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2006-09-16 11:56:04 Re: Tiny plpython fix