Greetings, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > >> On Tue, 2024-02-06 at 12:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >>> I was, and remain, of the opinion that that was a bad idea that > >>> we'll eventually revert, just like we previously got rid of most > >>> inessential log chatter in the default configuration. > > >> Unsurprisingly, I want to argue against that. > > > I tend to agree with this position- log_checkpoints being on has been a > > recommended configuration for a very long time and is valuable > > information to have about what's been happening when someone does go and > > look at the log. > > We turned on default log_checkpoints in v15, which means that behavior > has been in the field for about sixteen months. I don't think that > that gives it the status of a settled issue; my bet is that most > users still have not seen it.
Apologies for not being clear- log_checkpoints being on has been a configuration setting that I (and many others I've run into) have been recommending since as far back as I can remember. I was not referring to the change in the default. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
