Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Currently vacuum verbose outputs vacuum logs as follows. The first log > > message INFO: vacuuming "public.hoge" writes the relation name with > > schema name but subsequent vacuum logs output only relation name > > without schema name. I've encountered a situation where there are some > > same name tables in different schemas and the concurrent vacuum logs > > made me hard to distinguish tables. Is there any reasons why we don't > > write an explicit name in vacuum verbose logs? If not, can we add > > schema names to be more clearly? > > That's definitely a good idea. lazy_vacuum_rel() uses in one place > dbname.schname.relname for autovacuum. This is an inconsistent bit, > but that's not really worth changing and there is always > log_line_prefix = '%d'.
Worth keeping in mind that INFO messages do not normally go to the server log, but rather only to the client. If it were a problem at the server side, you could also suggest adding %p to the log line prefix to disambiguate. Maybe the scenario where this is a real problem is vacuumdb -j ... > In vacuum_rel()@vacuum.c, there are a couple of logs that could be > improved as well with the schema name. I agree that there's a lot of room for improvement there. If I'm allowed some scope creep, I'd say that gathering detailed vacuum info from both autovacuum and user-invoked vacuum in a central place would be very welcome. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
