| From: | "Tomas Vondra" <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Tomas Vondra" <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: regular logging of checkpoint progress |
| Date: | 2011-09-02 15:02:04 |
| Message-ID: | 43658c684e9388daf2f8481899571e54.squirrel@sq.gransy.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2 Září 2011, 15:44, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On fre, 2011-09-02 at 11:01 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> What about logging it with a lower level, e.g. NOTICE instead of the
>> current LOG? If that's not a solution then a new GUC is needed I
>> guess.
>
> Changing the log level is not the appropriate solution. Make it a
> configuration parameter.
Why is it inappropriate solution? There's a log_checkpoints GUC that
drives it and you can either get basic info (summary of the checkpoint) or
detailed log (with a lower log level).
In the first patch I've proposed a new GUC (used to set how often the info
should be logged or disable it), but Josh Berkus pointed out that I should
get rid of it if I can. Which is what I've done in the following patches.
Tomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-09-02 15:06:29 | Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-09-02 14:53:50 | Re: postgresql.conf archive_command example |