Re: libpq debug log

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Iwata, Aya" <iwata(dot)aya(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Yugo Nagata' <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: libpq debug log
Date: 2018-09-07 13:28:10
Message-ID: 4bc9abbd-44a0-1787-b410-4e68b5ab3228@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 04/09/2018 02:29, Iwata, Aya wrote:
> Since I'd like to monitor the information the server and the client exchange,
> I think monitoring protocol messages is good.
>
> When a slow query is occurs, we check this client side trace log.
> The purpose of this log acquisition I thought is to identify where is the problem:
> server side, application side or traffic.
> And if the problem is in application side, checking the trace log to identify what is the problem.

Between perf/systemtap/dtrace and wireshark, you can already do pretty
much all of that. Have you looked at those and found anything missing?

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-09-07 13:45:10 Re: libpq stricter integer parsing
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-09-07 13:17:10 Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module