| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Autovacuum on by default? |
| Date: | 2006-08-18 01:01:23 |
| Message-ID: | 1265.1155862883@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> How do you figure that? The point of logging what's done is so that you
>> can find out what autovac has been doing, not what it's doing right now.
> I don't think the server logs is the place to record history autovacuum
> activity. I am not saying we might not need that functionality, but not
> in the server logs, and I think others seem to agree.
Um, so what do you think the server log *is* for, if not a historical
activity record? This position would certainly surprise a lot of people
who use the log that way ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2006-08-18 01:04:29 | Re: Can I assume there's only one _RETURN rule? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-18 00:52:45 | Re: Can I assume there's only one _RETURN rule? |