Hello,
At Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:20:23 +0900, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote in
<CAD21AoBN-Hsih7HEP8ey6NUwQgwYj0O7eMuaRtas-6+CyafOgA@mail.gmail.com>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > Hello, it would be too late but I'd like to propose this because
> > this cannot be back-patched.
> >
> >
> > In autovacuum logs, "%u skipped frozen" shows the number of pages
> > skipped by ALL_FROZEN only in aggressive vacuum.
> >
> > So users cannot tell whether '0 skipped-frozen' means a
> > non-agressive vacuum or no frozen-pages in an agressive vacuum.
> >
> > I think it is nice to have an indication whether the scan was
> > "agressive" or not in log output.
>
> Good idea. I also was thinking about this.
Thanks. Currently we cannot use "skipped-frozen" to see the
effect of ALL_FROZEN.
> > Like this,
> >
> >> LOG: automatic aggressive vacuum of table "template1.pg_catalog.pg_statistic": index scans: 0
> >
> > "0 skipped frozen" is uesless in non-aggressive vacuum but
> > removing it would be too-much. Inserting "aggressive" reduces
> > machine-readability so it might be better in another place. The
> > attached patch does the following.
> >
> >> LOG: automatic vacuum of table "postgres.public.pgbench_branches": mode: normal, index scans: 0
> >> LOG: automatic vacuum of table "postgres.public.pgbench_branches": mode: aggressive, index scans: 0
> >
>
> Should we add this even to the manual vacuum verbose message?
I forgot that. The patch adds the mode indication in the first
message of VACUUM VERBOSE.
| =# vacuum freeze verbose it;
| INFO: vacuuming "public.it" in aggressive mode
| INFO: "it": found 0 removable, 0 nonremovable row versions in 0 out of 0 pages
...
| Skipped 0 pages due to buffer pins, 0 frozen pages.
I still feel a bit uneasy about the word "aggressive" here. Is it
better to be "freezing" or something?
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
