Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-03-03 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: >> Because there are already various tools available to log activity of >> session processes, but there are no other ways to log the activity of >> autovacuum. Why are the existing settings not sufficient for this >>

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-03-01 Thread Jeff Janes
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2/10/17 03:38, Simon Riggs wrote: > > I guess its fairly obvious in the title, but > > log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs only autovacuums. > > > > What isn't obvious is why that

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-03-01 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 2/10/17 03:38, Simon Riggs wrote: > I guess its fairly obvious in the title, but > log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs only autovacuums. > > What isn't obvious is why that restruction is useful. Because there are already various tools available to log activity of session

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-14 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/13/17 11:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote: FWIW, this is a significant problem outside of DDL. Once you're past 1-2 levels of nesting SET client_min_messages = DEBUG becomes completely useless. I think the ability to filter logging based on context would be very valuable. AFAIK you could actually

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 13 February 2017 at 17:12, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >>> On 2/10/17 2:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote: That having been

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-13 Thread Simon Riggs
On 13 February 2017 at 17:12, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >> On 2/10/17 2:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> That having been said, I think it could certainly be useful to have >>> more control over what DDL

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 2/10/17 2:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> That having been said, I think it could certainly be useful to have >> more control over what DDL gets logged in foreground processes. > > FWIW, this is a significant problem

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-12 Thread Jim Nasby
On 2/10/17 2:33 PM, Robert Haas wrote: That having been said, I think it could certainly be useful to have more control over what DDL gets logged in foreground processes. FWIW, this is a significant problem outside of DDL. Once you're past 1-2 levels of nesting SET client_min_messages = DEBUG

Re: [HACKERS] log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs

2017-02-10 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote: > I guess its fairly obvious in the title, but > log_autovacuum_min_duration doesn't log VACUUMs only autovacuums. > > What isn't obvious is why that restruction is useful. > > I say that it would be helpful to log all