From: | Arthur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: query logging of prepared statements |
Date: | 2019-03-04 15:53:31 |
Message-ID: | 70868e0d-2a29-36c8-e3e2-f54a56804bc4@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Hello Justin,
On 27.02.2019 21:06, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I'm attaching a v2 patch which avoids repeated logging of PREPARE, rather than
> making such logs conditional on log_error_verbosity=VERBOSE, since
> log_error_verbosity is documented to control whether these are output:
> DETAIL/HINT/QUERY/CONTEXT/SQLSTATE.
I looked the patch. I got interesting result with different parameters.
With log_statement='all' and log_min_duration_statement='0' I get:
=# execute test_ins(3);
LOG: statement: execute test_ins(3);
LOG: duration: 17.283 ms
But with log_statement='none' and log_min_duration_statement='0' I get:
=# execute test_ins(3);
LOG: duration: 8.439 ms statement: execute test_ins(3);
DETAIL: prepare: prepare test_ins (int) as
insert into test values ($1);
Is it intended? In the second result I got the query details.
--
Arthur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nicola Contu | 2019-03-04 16:01:09 | Re: Performance comparison between Pgsql 10.5 and Pgsql 11.2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-04 14:22:28 | Re: Performance comparison between Pgsql 10.5 and Pgsql 11.2 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2019-03-04 16:20:48 | Re: speeding up planning with partitions |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2019-03-04 15:53:25 | Re: Online verification of checksums |