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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
Date
Msg-id 927709.1635692359@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> writes:
> How about we enable it out of the box?

No.

The general policy at the moment is that a normally-functioning server
should emit *no* log traffic by default (other than a few messages
at startup and shutdown).  log_checkpoints is a particularly poor
candidate for an exception to that policy, because it would produce so
much traffic.  No DBA would be likely to consider it as anything but
log spam.

> It seems the checkpoint stats, that are emitted to server logs when
> the GUC log_checkpoints is enabled, are so important that a postgres
> database provider would ever want to disable the GUC.

This statement seems ridiculous on its face.  If users need to wait
with bated breath for a checkpoint report, we have something else
we need to fix.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box?
Next
From: Pavel Borisov
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature request for adoptive indexes