Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 14:53 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >  Maybe something like this is better:
> > 
> > LOG: index passes: 1  pages: removed 0, 197 remain  tuples: removed 7199, 
> > 2338 remain  CPU usage: whatever
> > CONTEXT: Automatic vacuuming of table "database.public.w"
> 
> Yours is better.
> 
> I've implemented this:
> 
> LOG: autovac "public.w" index passes: 1  pages: removed 0, 197 remain
> tuples: removed 7199, 2338 remain  CPU usage: whatever
> 
> I'm happy if this gets removed later, but I think it will help everybody
> understand how multi-vacuums are working and what the best way to
> specify the controls should be.
> 
> Not sure about the CONTEXT bit. I think its verbose, plus I thought that
> was for ERRORs only. I will defer on this point, since I know y'all
> understand that better than I.

I've tinkered with this patch a bit.  Sample output:

LOG:  automatic vacuum of table "alvherre.public.foo": index scans: 0
        pages: removed 0, 11226 remain
        tuples: 1300683 removed, 1096236 remain
        system usage: CPU 0.29s/0.38u sec elapsed 2.56 sec

Please comment.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to