Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Whether the string is "AUTO " or "autovacuum: " seems rather the same
> > thing to me :-) I agree with the general idea. I think "autovacuum: "
> > makes it clearer that it's not part of the actual command syntax, so
> > maybe I'
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Whether the string is "AUTO " or "autovacuum: " seems rather the same
> thing to me :-) I agree with the general idea. I think "autovacuum: "
> makes it clearer that it's not part of the actual command syntax, so
> maybe I'll put half a vote for that o
On Jan 14, 2008 1:31 AM, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whether the string is "AUTO " or "autovacuum: " seems rather the same
> thing to me :-) I agree with the general idea.
Yeah, forgot to mention I find it a very good idea.
--
Guillaume
---(end of broadca
Guillaume Smet escribió:
> On Jan 13, 2008 10:59 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think this would be a helpful change, but some might find it
> > confusing. Thoughts?
>
> If possible, something like:
> autovacuum: VACUUM ANALYZE foo.bar
> could be less confusing.
> It's weird to jus
Guillaume Smet wrote:
On Jan 13, 2008 11:27 PM, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AUTOVACUUM ANALYZE foo.bar more clear.
Doesn't autovacuum also trigger ANALYZE only?
That's why I proposed an 'autovacuum:' prefix.
Oh so:
autovacuum: vacuum
autovacuum: analyze
autovacuum: vacuum an
On Jan 13, 2008 11:27 PM, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AUTOVACUUM ANALYZE foo.bar more clear.
Doesn't autovacuum also trigger ANALYZE only?
That's why I proposed an 'autovacuum:' prefix.
--
Guillaume
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5:
Tom Lane wrote:
I was just noticing that $SUBJECT is hard --- the entry in current_query
looks exactly like a manual vacuum command, and there's not anything in
the other fields that looks different either.
Since autovacuum.c is making up its pgstat_report_activity string
anyway, it would be eas
On Jan 13, 2008 10:59 PM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this would be a helpful change, but some might find it
> confusing. Thoughts?
If possible, something like:
autovacuum: VACUUM ANALYZE foo.bar
could be less confusing.
It's weird to just add AUTO in front of the query.
--
Gui
I was just noticing that $SUBJECT is hard --- the entry in current_query
looks exactly like a manual vacuum command, and there's not anything in
the other fields that looks different either.
Since autovacuum.c is making up its pgstat_report_activity string
anyway, it would be easy to make the stri
