Re: log_autovacuum - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: log_autovacuum
Date
Msg-id 15057.1176849146@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: log_autovacuum  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: log_autovacuum  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-patches
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> BTW, shouldn't the log entry distinguish whether this was VACUUM,
>>> ANALYZE, or both?
>>
>> We don't actually log anything for ANALYZE (the logging code is in
>> lazy_vacuum_rel).
>>
>> Maybe it should be in autovacuum.c.

Actually, I had misunderstood where you were proposing to put this.
I believe that where you have it, the elapsed-time indication will
only cover the VACUUM step; so it's not relevant to this code whether
an ANALYZE would happen too.

My suggestion is that you add similar but independent logging to
analyze.c, controlled by the same min-duration variable.  So the
log output would treat autovac and autoanalyze as two independently
loggable operations.  I don't think there's much to print about
an autoanalyze except its runtime ... well, maybe you could print
the numbers of rows sampled and estimated, but I dunno if it matters.
The point of doing it is just to be able to track what the heck
autovacuum is doing ...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: log_autovacuum