| From: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | adrien(dot)nayrat(at)anayrat(dot)info, Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New GUC to sample log queries |
| Date: | 2018-11-19 13:52:05 |
| Message-ID: | CA+q6zcVirXHe7ZGGDMOn0dmWNbXzkwih-+h96MZmKvSWzHbz+Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 2:40 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 11/19/18 2:57 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 12:18:33PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> >> Since it's hard to come up with a concise name that will mention sampling rate
> >> in the context of min_duration_statement, I think it's fine to name this
> >> configuration "log_sample_rate", as long as it's dependency from
> >> log_min_duration_statements is clearly explained in the documentation.
> >
> > log_sample_rate looks fine to me as a name.
>
> That seems far too short to me - the name should indicate it applies to
> statement logging. I'd say log_statement_sample_rate is better.
I agree, sounds reasonable.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-11-19 14:19:07 | Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables (wal_level=minimal) |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-11-19 13:46:30 | Re: New GUC to sample log queries |