On 9/28/17, 8:46 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: >>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:44 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossa...@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
