Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-17 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule writes: > We can introduce new feature without hard dependency on CSV format Look, the long and the short of it is that there is not consensus that this measurement is worth creating a new CSV log column for. And from that, there is also not consensus that it's worth putting into lo

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-17 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-17 7:12 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Robert Haas > wrote: > > I agree. I don't think the idea of pushing this into the > > log_line_prefix stuff as a one-off is a very good one. Sure, we could > > wedge it in there, but we've got an existing precedent that

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-16 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > I agree. I don't think the idea of pushing this into the > log_line_prefix stuff as a one-off is a very good one. Sure, we could > wedge it in there, but we've got an existing precedent that everything > that you can get with log_line_prefix

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-14 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule writes: > 2014-04-14 14:57 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas : >> I agree. I don't think the idea of pushing this into the >> log_line_prefix stuff as a one-off is a very good one. Sure, we could >> wedge it in there, but we've got an existing precedent that everything >> that you can get with

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-14 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-14 14:57 GMT+02:00 Robert Haas : > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Gregory Smith > wrote: > > On 4/6/14 2:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> Proposed options are interesting for "enterprise" using, when you have a > >> some more smart tools for log entry processing, and when you need a > c

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-14 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Gregory Smith wrote: > On 4/6/14 2:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> Proposed options are interesting for "enterprise" using, when you have a >> some more smart tools for log entry processing, and when you need a complex >> view about performance of billions queries -

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-09 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-10 5:50 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > 2014-04-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > >> So do you want to just print lock time for error'd statements, won't > >> it better to > >> do it for non-error'd statements as well or rather I feel i

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-09 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2014-04-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : >> So do you want to just print lock time for error'd statements, won't >> it better to >> do it for non-error'd statements as well or rather I feel it can be more >> useful >> for non-error statements?

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-08 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-08 18:34 GMT+02:00 Gregory Smith : > On 4/6/14 2:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> >> Proposed options are interesting for "enterprise" using, when you have a >> some more smart tools for log entry processing, and when you need a complex >> view about performance of billions queries - when

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-08 Thread Gregory Smith
On 4/6/14 2:46 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: Proposed options are interesting for "enterprise" using, when you have a some more smart tools for log entry processing, and when you need a complex view about performance of billions queries - when cancel time and lock time is important piece in mosaic

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-08 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > 2014-04-04 6:51 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Pavel Stehule > > >> wrote: > >> > 2014-03-27 17:56 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : > >> >> So I'll prepare a some prototy

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-07 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2014-04-04 6:51 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Pavel Stehule >> wrote: >> > 2014-03-27 17:56 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : >> >> So I'll prepare a some prototypes in next month for >> >> >> >> 1. log a execution time

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-06 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-04-04 6:51 GMT+02:00 Amit Kapila : > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > 2014-03-27 17:56 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : > >> So I'll prepare a some prototypes in next month for > >> > >> 1. log a execution time for cancelled queries, > >> 2. track a query lock time > >> >

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-03 Thread Amit Kapila
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > 2014-03-27 17:56 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : >> So I'll prepare a some prototypes in next month for >> >> 1. log a execution time for cancelled queries, >> 2. track a query lock time >> > > When I though about this proposal, I found so our impl

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-04-01 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-27 17:56 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : > Hello > > After week, I can to evaluate a community reflection: > > > 2014-03-19 16:34 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : > > Hello >> >> I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are >> small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-27 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello After week, I can to evaluate a community reflection: 2014-03-19 16:34 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule : > Hello > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time ca

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-27 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello 2014-03-20 1:28 GMT+01:00 Josh Berkus : > Pavel, > > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements > > Manually cancelled? state

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-20 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-20 9:47 GMT+01:00 Mark Kirkwood : > On 20/03/14 20:08, Pavel Stehule wrote: > >> >> >> >> 2014-03-20 7:25 GMT+01:00 Mark Kirkwood > Also I think this would probably only make sense for TEMPORARY >> tables - otherwise you can get this sort of thing going on: >> >> - you create a

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-20 Thread Mark Kirkwood
On 20/03/14 20:08, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2014-03-20 7:25 GMT+01:00 Mark Kirkwood Sorry Pavel - what you have said above is difficult for me to understand - if the limit is intended as a *session* limit then concurrent activity from multiple sessions makes it behave - well - strangely to say

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-20 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-20 7:25 GMT+01:00 Mark Kirkwood : > On 20/03/14 13:28, Josh Berkus wrote: > > 3. relation limit - possibility to set session limit for maximum size of >>> relations. Any relation cannot be extended over this limit in session, >>> when >>> this value is higher than zero. Motivation - we us

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-20 5:36 GMT+01:00 Amit Kapila : > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > > Hello > > > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution ti

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Mark Kirkwood
On 20/03/14 13:28, Josh Berkus wrote: 3. relation limit - possibility to set session limit for maximum size of relations. Any relation cannot be extended over this limit in session, when this value is higher than zero. Motivation - we use lot of queries like CREATE TABLE AS SELECT .. , and some

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Amit Kapila
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements > > 2. fatal verbose - this patch

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-20 1:28 GMT+01:00 Josh Berkus : > Pavel, > > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements > > Manually cancelled? statement_tim

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Josh Berkus
Pavel, > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are > small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements Manually cancelled? statement_timeout? Anyway, +1 to add the time to the existing log

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2014-03-19 23:31 GMT+01:00 Vik Fearing : > On 03/19/2014 04:34 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Hello > > > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches > > are small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelle

Re: [HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Vik Fearing
On 03/19/2014 04:34 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches > are small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: > > 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements +1 I even wrote a patch to do this, but i

[HACKERS] four minor proposals for 9.5

2014-03-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hello I wrote a few patches, that we use in our production. These patches are small, but I hope, so its can be interesting for upstream: 1. cancel time - we log a execution time cancelled statements 2. fatal verbose - this patch ensure a verbose log for fatal errors. It simplify a investigation