Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output
Date: 2021-12-11 21:16:39
Message-ID: CAH2-WznhgXAuReLJccR-WSVX8x_OJxYB3hOwqvL9U=p8eD=trQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 1:13 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> Yes -- in order to report aggressiveness in VACUUM VERBOSE. But the
> autovacuum case still reports verbose-ness, in the same way as it
> always has -- in that same LOG entry. We don't want to repeat
> ourselves in the VERBOSE case, which will have already indicated its
> verboseness in the up-front ereport().

Sorry, I meant "indicated its aggressiveness in the up-front ereport()".

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-12-11 22:00:44 Re: Building postgresql from sources, statically linked, linux
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2021-12-11 21:13:56 Re: Unifying VACUUM VERBOSE and log_autovacuum_min_duration output