Larry Rosenman wrote:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 12:28:21PM -0500, Larry Rosenman wrote:
>>> Since both vacuum and autovacuum will be cutting stats records, do
>>> we want to just have the autovacuum
>>> stats record have the fact that it was autovacuum that did the
>>> vacuum? 
>>> Or, is there a way when vacuum is run by autovacuum that I can get a
>>> flag to set that says this (vacuum|analyze) was done by the
>>> autovacuum daemon? 
>>> I agree that the existing stats calls are good, but I'm still
>>> reading code to see whether I can determine
>>> at the time they are cut that this was autovacuum that did it.
>> I think noting autovac vacuums/analyzes seperately is
>> but not all that important. It'd probably be pretty easy to tell the
>> difference just knowing what (if any) manual vacuums your system
>> runs. 
>> While we're looking at logging, are you going to add stats stuff for
>> the bgwriter as well, or should we add this to the TODO?
> I was going to do that after I got some comfort with what I'm doing
> here.

I've put a WIP patch up for comments:

this is *NOT* for application, as I still need to add access to the new
fields to
the views, etc.  

I'm looking to get comments on it. 

Larry Rosenman           
Phone: +1 512-248-2683                 E-Mail:
US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to