On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossa...@amazon.com> wrote: >>> Alright, I've added logging for autovacuum in v23. I ended up needing to >>> do a little restructuring to handle the case when the relation was skipped >>> because the lock could not be obtained. While doing so, I became >>> convinced that LOG was probably the right level for autovacuum logs. > >> OK, of course let's not change the existing log levels. This could be >> always tuned later on depending on feedback from others. I can see >> that guc.c also uses elevel == 0 for some logic, so we could rely on >> that as you do. > > FWIW, I don't think this patch should be mucking with logging behavior > at all; that's not within its headline charter, and I doubt many people > are paying attention. I propose to commit it without that. If you feel > hot about changing the logging behavior, you can resubmit that as a new > patch in a new thread where it will get some visibility and debate on > its own merits.
Okay. I am fine with that as well. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
