Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Date: 2021-12-11 20:24:44
Message-ID: 20211211202444.m52fl2bclt72mktn@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2021-12-11 09:52:29 -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:30 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > I think some actually ended up being omitted compared to the previous
> > state. E.g. "aggressively vacuuming ...", but I think others as well.
>
> The "aggressive-ness" is reported by a distinct ereport() with the
> patch, so you'll still see that information.

But the ereport is inside an if (verbose), no?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-12-11 21:13:56 Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Previous Message Rob Gansevles 2021-12-11 20:06:28 Building postgresql from sources, statically linked, linux