At Thu, 5 Oct 2017 13:41:42 +0200, Alvaro Herrera
wrote in <20171005114142.dupjeqe2cnplhgkx@alvherre.pgsql>
> Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
>
> > # This reminded me of a concern. I'd like to count vacuums that
> > # are required but skipped by lock-failure, or killed by other
> > # backend.
>
> We c
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> # This reminded me of a concern. I'd like to count vacuums that
> # are required but skipped by lock-failure, or killed by other
> # backend.
We clearly need to improve the stats and logs related to vacuuming work
executed, both by autovacuum and manually invoked. One
At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 08:22:27 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote in
<2017100317.gj4...@tamriel.snowman.net>
> Greetings,
>
> * Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> > At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier
> > wrote in
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, S
Greetings,
* Kyotaro HORIGUCHI (horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier
> wrote in
>
> > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > I certainly don't care for the idea of adding log messages saying we
> > > aren't doing any
At Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:23:08 +0900, Michael Paquier
wrote in
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I certainly don't care for the idea of adding log messages saying we
> > aren't doing anything just to match a count that's incorrectly claiming
> > that checkpoints are happe
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I certainly don't care for the idea of adding log messages saying we
> aren't doing anything just to match a count that's incorrectly claiming
> that checkpoints are happening when they aren't.
>
> The down-thread suggestion of keeping track
Vik, all,
* Vik Fearing (vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were
> increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs
> with log_checkpoints enabled.
> After some searching, I found that it was the idle checkpoints
On 2017-10-02 07:43:31 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> >> > I'd be ok w
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> > I'd be ok with applying this now, or in 10.1 - but I do think we should
>>
On 2017-10-02 07:39:18 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> > I'd be ok with applying this now, or in 10.1 - but I do think we should
> > fix this before 11. If nobody protests I'll push later t
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:27 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> I'd be ok with applying this now, or in 10.1 - but I do think we should
> fix this before 11. If nobody protests I'll push later today, so we can
> get some bf cycles for the very remote case
Hi,
On 2017-10-02 00:19:33 +0200, Vik Fearing wrote:
> I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were
> increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs
> with log_checkpoints enabled.
>
> After some searching, I found that it was the idle checkpoints that
I recently had a sad because I noticed that checkpoint counts were
increasing in pg_stat_bgwriter, but weren't accounted for in my logs
with log_checkpoints enabled.
After some searching, I found that it was the idle checkpoints that
weren't being logged. I think this is a missed trick in 6ef2eba
13 matches
Mail list logo