On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 07:55, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> a bit of work in userland, I don't see this even being justified as an INFO
> or LOG level message. Anytime I can script a SQL-level monitor for
> something that's easy to tie into Nagios or something, I greatly prefer that
> to log file scraping for it anyway.
Log files can be very useful for details, but they suck for noticing
the pattern in the first place :-)
> verbosity of similar failure mode tests that follow it. Right now failure
> to acquire a lock is just not considered a log-worthy issue, and I agree
> that it's worth considering whether it should be.
Or should it perhaps be a per-table counter in pg_stat_user_tables,
given your statement above?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2011-01-05 13:24:45|
|Subject: Re: Streaming replication as a separate permissions|
|Previous:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2011-01-05 12:08:32|
|Subject: Re: Support for negative index values in array fetching|