On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 6:07 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> On 2021-Nov-10, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > > > On 11/10/21, 9:43 AM, "Bharath Rupireddy" < > bharath.rupireddyforpostg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > As discussed in [1], isn't it a better idea to add some of activity > > > messages [2] such as recovery, archive, backup, streaming etc. to > > > server logs at LOG level? > > > I think this would make the logs far too noisy for many servers. For > > archiving alone, this could cause tens of thousands more log messages > > per hour on a busy system. I think you can already see such > > information at a debug level, anyway. > > Yeah. If we had some sort of ring buffer in which to store these > messages, the user could examine them through a view; they would still > be accessible in a running server, but they would not be written to the > server log. > That's a good idea. How about also adding some GUC(s) to the log archive, recovery related log messages just like we have for checkpoints, autovacuum etc? Maybe something like log_archive, log_recovery etc. -- With Regards, Ashutosh Sharma.
