Hi
>> What would be useful logging-wise is if the log line for the query itself
>> could contain lock wait time, but that doesn't sound like what you're
>> proposing?
>>
>
> I hope, so I propose this idea. First time I wanted talk about the idea.
> Next step is the talk about format.
>
Some enh
2016-02-17 3:43 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby :
> On 2/14/16 11:24 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> > We have a patch, that inject logs about the time waiting on locks
>> before
>> > query execution. This feature helps us lot of, and I hope, it can be
>> > generally useful.
>>
>> Doesn't log_lo
On 2/14/16 11:24 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> We have a patch, that inject logs about the time waiting on locks before
> query execution. This feature helps us lot of, and I hope, it can be
> generally useful.
Doesn't log_lock_waits cover that territory already?
It does. But It cr
2016-02-14 17:46 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane :
> Pavel Stehule writes:
> > We have a patch, that inject logs about the time waiting on locks before
> > query execution. This feature helps us lot of, and I hope, it can be
> > generally useful.
>
> Doesn't log_lock_waits cover that territory already?
>
It
Pavel Stehule writes:
> We have a patch, that inject logs about the time waiting on locks before
> query execution. This feature helps us lot of, and I hope, it can be
> generally useful.
Doesn't log_lock_waits cover that territory already?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent vi
Hi,
the interpretation of slow queries or entries from auto-explain log can be
difficult some times, because the the main time of query evaluation is
waiting on lock, and this number isn't in related entry. Our situation is
little bit difficult, because we have not direct access to PostgreSQL logs
