Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Sawada Masahiko
Subject Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE
Date
Msg-id CAD21AoCvghQ3LithAFWaum61U-qZcgG5ZfSomTG4YZiwVoSTBQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Uh, are we really using INFO to log this?  I thought that was a
> discouraged level to use anymore.  Why not NOTICE?
>

I think it should be INFO level because it is a information of REINDEX
command,such as progress of itself, CPU usage and so on. it would be
overkill if we output the logs as NOTICE level, and verbose outputs of
other maintenance command are emitted as INFO level.

> Also, when multiple tables are reindexed, do we emit lines for each
> index, or only for each table?  If we're going to emit a line for each
> index in the single-table mode, it seems more sensible to do the same
> for the multi-table forms also.
>

I agree that we emit lines for each table when we do reindex multiple tables.
The latest patch is attached.


Regards,

-------
Sawada Masahiko

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Abbreviated keys for Datum tuplesort (was: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization))
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: KNN-GiST with recheck