Re: Logging parallel worker draught

Benoit Lobréau <benoit.lobreau@dalibo.com>

From: Benoit Lobréau <benoit.lobreau@dalibo.com>

To: Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>

Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>, Alena Rybakina <a.rybakina@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih@amazon.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>

Date: 2025-01-29T16:41:45Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

V7_0001-Add-a-guc-for-parallel-worker-logging.patch (text/x-patch) patch 0001
V7_0002-Setup-counters-for-parallel-vacuums.patch (text/x-patch) patch 0002
V7_0003-Implements-logging-for-parallel-worker-usage-in-util.patch (text/x-patch) patch 0003
V7_0004-Implements-logging-for-parallel-worker-usage-in-quer.patch (text/x-patch) patch 0004

On 1/29/25 12:41 AM, Sami Imseih wrote:
> There will both be an INFO ( existing behavior ) and LOG ( new behavior ).
> This seems wrong to me and there should only really be one
> mechanism to log parallel workers for utility statements.
> Others may have different opinions.

In the use case you describe, I agree that the VERBOSE option is more 
suited for the job. But it's not the use case I had in mind for this
guc.

The "story" I have in mind is: I need to audit an instance I know 
nothing about. I ask the client to adapt the logging parameters for 
pgbadger (including this one), collect the logs and generate a report 
for the said period to have a broad overview of what is happenning.

I attached patches that implemented both your suggestions (I regrouped 
all the utilities together).

Thank you !

-- 
Benoit Lobréau
Consultant
http://dalibo.com