Re: Expensive log_line_prefix ?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alvaro Herrera
Тема Re: Expensive log_line_prefix ?
Дата
Msg-id 20121012033027.GA12861@alvh.no-ip.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Expensive log_line_prefix ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
Tom Lane escribió:
> Sergey Konoplev <gray.ru@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Sahagian, David
> > <david.sahagian@emc.com> wrote:
> >> Are there any "extra" costs to logging all this cool stuff ?
> >>
> >> log_line_prefix = '%m %a %u %p %c %m %v %x'
>
> > The formatting cost only but it is so insignificant that does not
> > worth bothering with it.
>
> IIRC, %m would imply a gettimeofday call, which might be expensive
> depending on your OS and hardware.  I think all the other info is
> "just sitting around", though.

Yeah, and having two %m means two gettimeofday calls.

Also, %c sort of implies %p, so having both is probably just a waste.

One other point is that it's probably a good idea to put in a %q in
there so that processes that don't have things like %v, %x don't have to
print a bunch of zeros (and also to prevent %a, %u from adding spaces
unnecessarily).

--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Raghavendra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Postgres DB Migration from 8.3 to 9.1
Следующее
От: urkpostenardr
Дата:
Сообщение: Limit+Offset query wrong result in Postgres 9.0.3 ?