From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Gregory Smith <gregsmithpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: four minor proposals for 9.5 |
Date: | 2014-04-17 05:12:01 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JqjTk3x_BiPFnnN3Jti3_uFxg=DSFKc1wzdzS3X4AJMQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I agree. I don't think the idea of pushing this into the
> log_line_prefix stuff as a one-off is a very good one. Sure, we could
> wedge it in there, but we've got an existing precedent that everything
> that you can get with log_line_prefix also shows up in the CSV output
> file. And it's easy to imagine LOTS more counters that somebody might
> want to have. Time spent planning, time spent executing, time spent
> waiting for disk I/O, time spent returning results to client, and I'm
> sure people will think of many others. I think this will balloon out
> of control if we don't have a more systematic design for this sort of
> thing.
Can't we think of some infrastructure similar to what is done for
log_duration and log_min_duration_statement?
Current it prints like below:
LOG: duration: 343.000 ms statement: create table t1(c1 int);
Let us say if user wants to track lock wait time a statement has
spent, then enable some config parameter (either log_lock_duration
or some other convenient way)
LOG: lock duration: 'x' ms statement: create table t1(c1 int);
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-04-17 05:14:23 | Re: Verbose output of pg_dump not show schema name |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-04-17 05:00:25 | Re: Patch: iff -> if |