Re: log_autovacuum

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