Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Date: 2021-11-26 21:57:12
Message-ID: 20211126215712.GF17618@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 12:37:32PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> My preferred approach to this is simple: redefine VACUUM VERBOSE to
> not show incremental output, which seems rather unhelpful anyway.

> I don't think that we need to keep the getrusage() stuff at all, though.

+1

> * VACUUM VERBOSE doesn't provide much of the most useful
> instrumentation that we have available in log_autovacuum_min_duration,
> and yet produces output that is ludicrously, unmanageably verbose --
> lots of pg_rusage_show() information for each and every step, which
> just isn't useful.

Not only not useful/unhelpful, but confusing.

It's what I complained about here.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20191220171132(dot)GB30414(at)telsasoft(dot)com

I see that lazy_scan_heap() still has a shadow variable buf...

--
Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-11-26 22:56:14 Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2021-11-26 21:16:36 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)