On 9/28/17, 8:46 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
>>>> Alright, I've added logging for autovacuum in v23. I ended up needing to
>>>> do a little restructuring to handle the case when the relation was skipped
>>>> because the lock could not be obtained. While doing so, I became
>>>> convinced that LOG was probably the right level for autovacuum logs.
>>
>>> OK, of course let's not change the existing log levels. This could be
>>> always tuned later on depending on feedback from others. I can see
>>> that guc.c also uses elevel == 0 for some logic, so we could rely on
>>> that as you do.
>>
>> FWIW, I don't think this patch should be mucking with logging behavior
>> at all; that's not within its headline charter, and I doubt many people
>> are paying attention. I propose to commit it without that. If you feel
>> hot about changing the logging behavior, you can resubmit that as a new
>> patch in a new thread where it will get some visibility and debate on
>> its own merits.
>
> Okay. I am fine with that as well.
Sure, that seems reasonable to me.
Nathan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers