Re: Logging parallel worker draught
Benoit Lobréau <benoit.lobreau@dalibo.com>
From: Benoit Lobréau <benoit.lobreau@dalibo.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-05-02T10:44:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
On 5/1/23 18:33, Robert Haas wrote: > Why not? It seems like something some people might want to log and > others not. Running the whole server at DEBUG1 to get this information > doesn't seem like a suitable answer. Since the statement is also logged, it could spam the log with huge queries, which might also be a reason to stop logging this kind of problems until the issue is fixed. I attached the patch without the guc anyway just in case. > What I was wondering was whether we would be better off putting this > into the statistics collector, vs. doing it via logging. Both > approaches seem to have pros and cons. We tried to explore different options with my collegues in another thread [1]. I feel like both solutions are worthwhile, and would be helpful. I plan to take a look at the pg_stat_statement patch [2] next. Since it's my first patch, I elected to choose the easiest solution to implement first. I also proposed this because I think logging can help pinpoint a lot of problems at a minimal cost, since it is easy to setup and exploit for everyone, everywhere [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d657df20-c4bf-63f6-e74c-cb85a81d0383@dalibo.com [2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/6acbe570-068e-bd8e-95d5-00c737b865e8%40gmail.com -- Benoit Lobréau Consultant http://dalibo.com