Re: log_duration is redundant, no?

Guillaume Smet wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > I don't find this very persuasive --- it sounds awfully messy, and in
> > fact isn't that exactly the old behavior we got rid of because no one
> > could understand it?
>
> I gave real use cases and we use it every day. It really helps us as a
> PostgreSQL hosting company.
>
> The fact is that no tool could really exploit this behaviour before. I
> agree it's a totally useless information if you don't have a tool to
> analyze the logs. This is no longer the case as pgFouine can extract
> this information and make it useful by aggregating it.
>
> Perhaps we could rename it to log_all_duration (my english is not that
> good so I'm not sure it's a good name) and explain how it can be
> useful in the documentation.

If you are using an external tool, can't you just restrict what you
display based on the logged duration?

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +