From: | Jason Dusek <jason(dot)dusek(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Philipp Kraus <philipp(dot)kraus(at)flashpixx(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: logger table |
Date: | 2012-12-25 16:19:31 |
Message-ID: | CAO3NbwNHi-0oa1F1Ng_kiw9j=Qu+GXTvJENuHP_oHQHKv63oZQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
2012/12/24 Philipp Kraus <philipp(dot)kraus(at)flashpixx(dot)de>:
> I need some ideas for creating a PG based logger. I have got a
> job, which can run more than one time. So the PK is at the
> moment jobid & cycle number. The inserts in this table are in
> parallel with the same username from different host
> (clustering). The user calls in the executable "myprint" and
> the message will insert into this table, but at the moment I
> don't know a good structure of the table. Each print call can
> be different length, so I think a text field is a good choice,
> but I don't know how can I create a good PK value. IMHO a
> sequence can be create problems that I'm logged in with the
> same user on multiple hosts, a hash key value like SHA1 based
> on the content are not a good choice, because content is not
> unique, so I can get key collisions. I would like to create
> on each "print" call a own record in the table, but how can I
> create a good key value and get no problems in parallel
> access. I think there can be more than 1000 inserts each
> second.
>
> Does anybody can post a good idea?
Why is it neccesry to have a primary key? What is the "cycle
number"?
For what it is worth, I put all my syslog in PG and have so far
been fine without primary keys. (I keep only an hour there at a
time, though, and it's only a few hundred megs.)
In the past, I have had trouble maintaining a high TPS while
having lots (hundreds) of connected clients; maybe you'll want
to use a connection pool.
--
Jason Dusek
pgp // solidsnack // C1EBC57DC55144F35460C8DF1FD4C6C1FED18A2B
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Johnston | 2012-12-25 16:26:00 | Re: Problem with the semantics of "select into" in a plpgsql function |
Previous Message | Seref Arikan | 2012-12-25 15:52:04 | Re: Problem with the semantics of "select into" in a plpgsql function |