| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alastair Turner <minion(at)decodable(dot)me>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Count and log pages set all-frozen by vacuum |
| Date: | 2024-10-31 16:14:07 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wz=5yogvWFj1F_v25zpU2BN3pPk+tme3KHc4RGbxnynPFg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:02 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I don't see it quite the same way. I agree that what users are really
> concerned about is the excessive number of unfrozen pages in the VM.
> But that's not the question here. The question is what should
> log_autovacuum_min_duration log. And I think it should log what the
> vacuum itself did, not what the state of the table ended up being
> around the time the vacuum ended.
I don't fundamentally disagree that the actual work performed by
VACUUM could also be useful. It's a question of emphasis.
FWIW I do disagree with the principle that log_autovacuum_min_duration
should only log things that are work performed by VACUUM. While most
things that it reports on currently do work that way, that in itself
doesn't seem like it should preclude reporting on visibilitymap_count
now.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul Jungwirth | 2024-10-31 16:18:44 | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-10-31 16:08:49 | Re: Use "protocol options" name instead of "protocol extensions" everywhere |