Tom Lane wrote:
> This would be a pretty bad idea IMHO, since it would lead to bloating
> the logs with autovacuum progress messages by default --- and whatever
> you may think about it, I really doubt that the average DBA will want
> those messages there all the time.
>
> I wonder whether it would be practical to let the autovacuum daemon have
> its own value of log_min_messages. The alternative to that seems to be
> to invent a new log severity level just for autovacuum, which is pretty
> gross (especially since it's not obvious how it should sort relative to
> LOG and DEBUG1).
While I personally think this would probably be a good idea, I also
recognize that it might be a solution in search of a problem. Now that
we have integrated autovacuum we should probably wait and see what
feedback we get from the field. That said, my argument for more
detailed logging of autovacuum activity is that vacuuming is VERY
important part of proper PG maintenance, as such lots of admins like to
keep a proactive eye to make sure there tables are getting the
maintenance they need.
Another thought: How about adding something to the stats system that an
admin can turn on / off. Maybe anew relation called
pg_stat_autovacuum_activity this would detail the last vacuum, last
analyze, number of vacuums / analyzes in the last 24 hours, last month
etc... I dunno, whatever peopel think is relevant.
Thoughts?
Matt
