Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
Date
Msg-id 20211103130428.GB5273@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov  3, 2021 at 08:45:46AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> If log_checkpoints=on wouldn't fill up the disk on my 5+-year old
> Raspberry Pi in less time that it takes to raise multiple children to
> adulthood even after disabling the OS-provided log rotation and
> compression, then it seems more than fair to say that for the vast
> majority of users, this isn't a real problem. And for those few for
> whom it *is* a real problem, they can still shut off log_checkpoints.
> It's not like anybody is proposing to remove the option.

Well, another issue is that if something unusual does happen, it appears
very visibly if you are looking just for LOG messages, while if you have
many checkpoint log messages, it might get lost.  If we want to log more
by default, I think we are looking at several issues:

*  enabling log rotation and log file reuse in the default install
*  changing the labels of some of the normal-operation log messages
*  changing the way some of these log messages are controlled
*  perhaps using a ring buffer for common log messages

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Map WAL segment files on PMEM as WAL buffers