Re: "as quickly as possible" (was: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait)

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 03:39:18
Message-ID: 20201119033918.GF26172@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 12:13:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> That still looks useful for debugging, so DEBUG1 sounds fine to me.

By the way, it strikes me that you could just do nothing as long as
(log_min_messages > DEBUG1), so you could encapsulate most of the
logic that plays with the lock tag using that.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com 2020-11-19 03:45:24 RE: Disable WAL logging to speed up data loading
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-11-19 03:34:33 Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM