Hi all,
Sorry for arriving so late into the discussion.
I don't know if it's possible but it could be useful to have the text
of the query which required the creation of the temporary files as an
additional DETAIL line. At least, if it's possible to have it in this
part of the code.
Thoughts?
Guillaume Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 1/12/07, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(2) there is already a generalized solution to this, it's called
log_min_error_statement.
I didn't think of that when posting my message but Bruce seems to say
that we can't use it in this case.
Dunno why
On 1/12/07, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Usually people don't want th query unless they ask for it. One nify
trick would be to print the query as DETAIL unless they are already
logging queries, but that just seems too complex. If you want the
query, why not just log them all?
In response to Guillaume Smet [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 1/12/07, Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Usually people don't want th query unless they ask for it. One nify
trick would be to print the query as DETAIL unless they are already
logging queries, but that just seems too complex. If
On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 17:16 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
/* reset flag so that die() interrupt won't cause
problems */
vfdP-fdstate = ~FD_TEMPORARY;
+ PG_TRACE1(temp__file__cleanup, vfdP-fileName);
+
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
The TRACE is in the wrong place no? I thought it was going to be after
the stat() operation so it could pass the file size.
We had that discussion already. If you only pass it after the stat()
then you cannot use DTrace, except when you
Simon Riggs wrote:
Also, I dunno much about DTrace, but I had the idea that you can't
simply throw a PG_TRACE macro into the source and think you are done
--- isn't there a file of probe declarations to add to? Not to mention
the documentation of what probes exist.
I didn't like
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 12:35:25PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I think the real criterion has to be is this probe useful to
developers?. I'm entirely uninterested in adding probes that are
targeted towards DBAs, as this one would have been --- if we think
there's a problem that a DBA would have,
On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 12:37 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
The trace probe was incorrect
Yes, incomplete, no doubt. On that point you were 100% right to reject.
and kind of at an odd place. I don't
think we want to go down the road of throwing trace in everwhere, do we?
I would like to see a
On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 12:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
The TRACE is in the wrong place no? I thought it was going to be after
the stat() operation so it could pass the file size.
We had that discussion already. If you only pass it
In response to Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have applied a modified version of your patch. I renamed the
parameter to 'log_temp_files', for consistency, added documentation, and
improved the wording, particularly mentioning that the logging happens
at file deletion time.
Thanks.
--
Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
I specified in the GUC config that minimum allowable value is -1.
I'd still tend
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+ A value of zero logs all temporary files, and positive
+ values log only files whose size is equal or greater than
+ the specified number of bytes.
Surely the measurement unit should be kbytes or disk blocks. And why
aren't you
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
+ A value of zero logs all temporary files, and positive
+ values log only files whose size is equal or greater than
+ the specified number of bytes.
Surely the measurement unit should be kbytes or disk
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Surely the measurement unit should be kbytes or disk blocks. And why
aren't you using that GUC UNITS infrastructure Peter put in?
Agreed. I have applied the following patch to make it kilobytes, and
documented it. I didn't put '-1kB'
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Surely the measurement unit should be kbytes or disk blocks. And why
aren't you using that GUC UNITS infrastructure Peter put in?
Agreed. I have applied the following patch to make it kilobytes, and
documented
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Surely the measurement unit should be kbytes or disk blocks. And why
aren't you using that GUC UNITS infrastructure Peter put in?
Agreed. I have applied the following patch to make it
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
and then zero
can be the off position, and we need not worry about whether -1 is
-1 byte or -1 kbyte.
All doing this does is make it impossible to log temp files of 1 byte.
How you figure that? It would make it
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hmm, that could be a little bit ugly. Suggestion: redefine the value
such that files *greater than* the given size are logged,
It already is that way, with 0 effectively meaning log all.
Oh, never mind,
Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
and then zero
can be the off position, and we need not worry about whether -1 is
-1 byte or -1 kbyte.
All doing this does is make it impossible to log temp files of 1 byte.
How you
On Jan 3, 2007, at 4:20 PM, Bill Moran wrote:
* trace_temp_files is now an int: -1 disables, 0 and up equate to
log if
the file is this size or larger
Another thought is to allow ignoring files over a certain size. The
reason is that if you end up creating 10MB of temp files, you can
In response to Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
+if (trace_temp_files != -1)
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
Because it would allow for the easy addition
Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran wrote:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
+ if (trace_temp_files != -1)
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
I specified in the GUC config that minimum allowable value is -1.
I'd still tend to go with Andrew's suggestion because it makes this
particular bit of code
In response to Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
I specified in the GUC config that minimum allowable value is -1.
I'd still tend to go with Andrew's
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 18:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a suggestion on how to do that and still have the
Bill Moran wrote:
+ if (trace_temp_files != -1)
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
cheers
andrew
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
In response to Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 18:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
+ if (trace_temp_files != -1)
Might be more robust to say
if (trace_temp_files = 0)
Because it would allow for the easy addition of more negative numbers
with magic value?
---(end of
Thanks to Simon Riggs and Bruce for input that helped me put this together.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
diff -c -r src.orig/backend/storage/file/fd.c src/backend/storage/file/fd.c
*** src.orig/backend/storage/file/fd.c Thu Dec 7 15:44:42 2006
--- src/backend/storage/file/fd.c Tue
Bill Moran wrote:
Thanks to Simon Riggs and Bruce for input that helped me put this together.
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Nitpick: also note our brace placement convention (though this would be
fixed by pgindent, but still).
--
Alvaro
Bill Moran wrote:
+ if (stat(vfdP-fileName, filestats) == 0) {
+ if (trace_temp_files)
Shouldn't these tests be the other way around?
cheers
andrew
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: You can help support the
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Bill Moran wrote:
Thanks to Simon Riggs and Bruce for input that helped me put this together.
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a suggestion on how to do that and still have the
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In response to Alvaro Herrera [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please change things to save the stat() syscall when the feature is not
in use.
Do you have a suggestion on how to do that and still have the PG_TRACE1()
work? That was specifically requested by Simon
34 matches
Mail list logo
