From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: sort_mem statistics ... |
Date: | 2005-10-18 23:07:05 |
Message-ID: | 20051018200648.A995@ganymede.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Looking at the code, I notice that the messages are all emitted at level
>>> NOTICE. Perhaps that was not such a good idea --- it'd be pretty much
>>> in-your-face if it were on all the time. Does anyone think it'd be a
>>> good idea to emit the trace_sort messages at level LOG, instead?
>
>> If someone sets trace_sort, does it matter what level its emit'd at?
>
> Well, yeah. It depends whether you are thinking of the trace feature as
> being used interactively, or as something turned on to gather data over
> time in a production installation. In the second case you'd want the
> info to go to the postmaster log, but not want to see it dumped on your
> terminal all the time ...
Oops, sorry, I was thinking in terms of syslog log levels ... :(
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-10-18 23:26:06 | Re: Seeing context switch storm with 10/13 snapshot of |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-18 22:57:16 | Re: sort_mem statistics ... |