Re: log_duration is redundant, no?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: log_duration is redundant, no?
Date: 2006-09-07 22:06:51
Message-ID: 28506.1157666811@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I mean:
> log_duration = on
> log_min_duration_statement = 500
> would log only duration for queries faster than 500 ms and duration +
> query text for queries slower than 500ms (we can easily avoid
> redundancy).

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?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2006-09-07 22:12:26 Re: log_duration is redundant, no?
Previous Message Guillaume Smet 2006-09-07 21:59:37 Re: log_duration is redundant, no?