Re: proposal - log_full_scan

From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal - log_full_scan
Date: 2021-04-17 16:54:50
Message-ID: 20210417165450.wtblqyuxr7sbfetr@nol
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 05:22:59PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> The fullscan of this table needs about 30ms and has 200K rows. So
> decreasing log_min_duration to this value is very risky.
>
> [...]
>
> I use pg_stat_all_tables.seq_scan and I see seq scans there. But I need to
> know the related queries.

Maybe you could use pg_qualstats ([1]) for that? It will give you the list of
quals (with the underlying queryid) with a tag to specify if they were executed
as an index scan or a sequential scan. It wouldn't detect queries doing
sequential scan that don't have any qual for the underlying relations, but
those shouldn't be a concern in your use case.

If you setup some sampling, the overhead should be minimal.

[1]: https://github.com/powa-team/pg_qualstats/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2021-04-17 17:54:34 Re: proposal - log_full_scan
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-04-17 16:35:45 Re: multi-install PostgresNode fails with older postgres versions