Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Date
Msg-id CAH2-Wzn81AdLoGyvky14_OfTdAUmvJHqnEHfi50WofJ=nU7GyQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 1:57 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> > * VACUUM VERBOSE doesn't provide much of the most useful
> > instrumentation that we have available in log_autovacuum_min_duration,
> > and yet produces output that is ludicrously, unmanageably verbose --
> > lots of pg_rusage_show() information for each and every step, which
> > just isn't useful.
>
> Not only not useful/unhelpful, but confusing.

Also makes testing harder.

> It's what I complained about here.
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20191220171132.GB30414@telsasoft.com
>
> I see that lazy_scan_heap() still has a shadow variable buf...

I noticed that myself. That function has had many accretions of code,
over decades. I often notice things that seem like they once made
sense (e.g., before we had HOT), but don't anymore.

I hope to be able to pay down more technical debt in this area for Postgres 15.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)