| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Indicate anti-wraparound autovacuum in log_autovacuum_min_duration |
| Date: | 2018-07-23 14:36:25 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYcSnhY=jfBuMLdgHUB5Db3Wbbpn_XhFSZ6zyhtN8M8=g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 4:22 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 09:38:38AM +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
>> Currently log_autovacuum_min_duration log message has no difference
>> between regular autovacuum and to prevent wraparound autovacuum. There
>> are important differences, for example, backend can automatically
>> cancel regular autovacuum, but not anti-wraparound. I think it is
>> useful indicate anti-wraparound in logs.
>
> Yes, a bit more verbosity would be nice for that. Using the term
> "anti-wraparound" directly in the logs makes the most sense?
I'm not particularly in love with that terminology. I doubt that it's
very clear to the average user.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sergei Kornilov | 2018-07-23 14:37:54 | Re: Log query parameters for terminated execute |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-07-23 14:35:02 | Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents? |