Thank you for the comment!
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 4:42 PM Michael Banck <mba...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 03:35:20PM +0900, Shinya Kato wrote:
> > I am proposing the introduction of two new GUC parameters,
> > log_autovacuum_{vacuum|analyze}_min_duration, to replace the existing
> > log_autovacuum_min_duration.
>
> How about adding log_autoanalyze_min_duration instead? That would still
> slightly retcon the log_autovacuum_min_duration meaning/semantics by no
> longer logging autoanalyze unless the new GUC is set, but at least not
> rename the GUC and make both shorter while still being comprehensible
> IMO. Not sure what others think?
I surely think adding log_autoanalyze_min_duration is simpler and
shorter, but the reason I chose this GUC name is for consistency with
other autovacuum parameters. Existing autovacuum parameters that have
separate settings for vacuum and analyze operations follow the pattern
autovacuum_{vacuum|analyze}_*.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/runtime-config-vacuum.html#RUNTIME-CONFIG-AUTOVACUUM
Shinya Kato
NTT OSS Center
