| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sawada Masahiko <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal : REINDEX xxx VERBOSE |
| Date: | 2015-05-13 19:53:53 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaKmEDGyG=vt3EF8Hex3inWhsjB_PtTsP9QuNyCKJsrkA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Uh, are we really using INFO to log this? I thought that was a
> discouraged level to use anymore. Why not NOTICE?
Well, as Masahiko-san points out, VACUUM uses INFO. I can't see any
good reason to make this different.
> Also, when multiple tables are reindexed, do we emit lines for each
> index, or only for each table? If we're going to emit a line for each
> index in the single-table mode, it seems more sensible to do the same
> for the multi-table forms also.
Hmm, yeah, I agree with that. I thought the patch worked that way,
but I see now that it doesn't. I think that should be changed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2015-05-13 19:54:40 | Re: PATCH: pgbench allow '=' in \set |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-05-13 19:28:21 | Re: Abbreviated keys for Datum tuplesort (was: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)) |