| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: "as quickly as possible" (was: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait) |
| Date: | 2020-11-19 03:13:44 |
| Message-ID: | 20201119031344.GD26172@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 02:48:40PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2020-11-18 18:41:27 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> We could make this more concurrent by copying lock->tag to a local
>> variable, releasing the lock, then doing all the string formatting and
>> printing. See attached quickly.patch.
>
> Sounds like a plan.
+1.
>> Now, when this code was written (d7318d43d, 2012), this was a LOG
>> message; it was demoted to DEBUG1 later (d8f15c95bec, 2015). I think it
>> would be fair to ... remove the message? Or go back to Simon's original
>> formulation from commit acac68b2bca, which had this message as DEBUG2
>> without any string formatting.
>
> I don't really have an opinion on this.
That still looks useful for debugging, so DEBUG1 sounds fine to me.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-11-19 03:22:44 | Re: POC: Cleaning up orphaned files using undo logs |
| Previous Message | tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com | 2020-11-19 02:43:07 | RE: POC: postgres_fdw insert batching |