Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

At Thu, 5 Oct 2017 13:41:42 +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote in <20171005114142.dupjeqe2cnplhgkx@alvherre.pgsql> > Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > > > # This reminded me of a concern. I'd like to count vacuums that > > # are required but skipped by lock-failure, or killed by

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > # This reminded me of a concern. I'd like to count vacuums that > # are required but skipped by lock-failure, or killed by other > # backend. We clearly need to improve the stats and logs related to vacuuming work executed, both by autovacuum and manually invoked. One

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 08:22:27 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote in <2017100317.gj4...@tamriel.snowman.net> > Greetings, > > * Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > > At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier > > wrote

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

Greetings, * Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote: > At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier > wrote in > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote in > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > I certainly don't care for the idea of adding log messages

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > I certainly don't care for the idea of adding log messages saying we > aren't doing anything just to match a count that's incorrectly claiming > that checkpoints are happening when they aren't. > > The down-thread

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

Vik, all, * Vik Fearing (vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were > increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs > with log_checkpoints enabled. > After some searching, I found that it was the idle

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

On 2017-10-02 07:43:31 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > >> > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote: >> > I'd be ok with applying this now,

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote: > > I'd be ok with applying this now, or in 10.1 - but I do think we should > > fix this before 11. If nobody

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote: > I'd be ok with applying this now, or in 10.1 - but I do think we should > fix this before 11. If nobody protests I'll push later today, so we can > get some bf cycles for

Re: [HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

Hi, On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote: > I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were > increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs > with log_checkpoints enabled. > > After some searching, I found that it was the idle checkpoints that

[HACKERS] Logging idle checkpoints

I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs with log_checkpoints enabled. After some searching, I found that it was the idle checkpoints that weren't being logged. I think this is a missed trick in