From: | Nik Tek <niktek2005(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Matheus de Oliveira <matioli(dot)matheus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: log_statement vs Statistics Collector (pg_stat_database,, etc) |
Date: | 2015-12-29 00:03:26 |
Message-ID: | CAHySzWWVrcZXNc5z6umEy5YBxo5ew4r9wOoAAyq+=NpwqeE2vw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Thank you Matheus!
Based on the study, there's very little performance impact when
enabling log_min_duration_statement,
right?
Thank you
Nik
On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 5:35 AM, Matheus de Oliveira <
matioli(dot)matheus(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Nik Tek <niktek2005(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I wanted to capture all the DML statements executed in the database
>> information (execution time, ).
>>
>> Question:
>> Can anyone point me pros and cons on either of the approaches.
>>
>> In my testing, I haven't found any performance degrade on application
>> operations when enabled the additional logging (below logging).
>>
>
> Besides log_min_duration_statement, you can use tools like
> pg_stat_statements [1] and POWA [2]. POWA authors even did a comparison of
> performance impact of having log_min_duration_statement (to latter process
> with pgBadger), using POWA extension and nothing, see [3].
>
> [1] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/pgstatstatements.html
> [2] http://dalibo.github.io/powa/
> [3] https://github.com/dalibo/powa/wiki/POWA-vs-pgBadger
>
>
> --
> Matheus de Oliveira
>
>
>
--
Thank you
NikTeki
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Whitney | 2015-12-29 04:01:02 | Re: log_statement vs Statistics Collector (pg_stat_database,, etc) |
Previous Message | Iñigo Salvat | 2015-12-28 17:31:50 | backward issue |