Re: Table-level log_autovacuum_min_duration

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Naoya Anzai
> <anzai-naoya(at)mxu(dot)nes(dot)nec(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
>> As a result, I think you should not delete VACOPT_VERBOSE.
>
> In v8 it is not deleted. It is still declared, and its use is isolated
> in gram.y, similarly to VACOPT_FREEZE.
>
>> According to the last mail I have posted, the difference of
>> manual-vacuum log and auto-vacuum log exists clearly.
>
> Did you test the latest patch v8? I have added checks in it to see if
> a process is an autovacuum worker to control elevel and the extra logs
> of v7 do not show up.
>
>> So, at least you should not touch the mechanism of VACOPT_VERBOSE
>> until both vacuum log formats are unified to a same format.
>
> If you mean that we should have the same kind of log outputs for
> autovacuum and manual vacuum, I think that this is not going to
> happen. Autovacuum entries are kept less verbose on purpose, contract
> that v7 clealy broke.
>
>> If you agree my think, please undo your removing VACOPT_VERBOSE work.
>
> Well, I don't agree :) And I am guessing that you did not look at v8
> as well. Centralizing the control of logs using log_min_duration is
> more extensible than simply having VACOPT_VERBOSE.

With the patch, VACUUM ANALYZE VERBOSE doesn't emit any verbose message.
Why did you remove that functionality?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao