| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Iwata, Aya" <iwata(dot)aya(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "'Yugo Nagata'" <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq debug log |
| Date: | 2018-09-04 00:57:33 |
| Message-ID: | 25440.1536022653@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Iwata, Aya" <iwata(dot)aya(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> writes:
> The purpose of this log acquisition I thought is to identify where is the problem:
> server side, application side or traffic.
TBH, I think the sort of logging you're proposing would be expensive
enough that *it* would be the bottleneck in a lot of cases. A lot
of people find that the existing server-side "log_statement" support
is too expensive to keep turned on in production --- and that logs only
received SQL queries, not the returned data, and certainly not every
message passed over the wire.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-09-04 01:19:56 | Re: pointless check in RelationBuildPartitionDesc |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-09-04 00:53:42 | Re: Caching query plan costs |