Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:36:27 -0800
From: David Gould <daveg@sonic.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>,
        Kevin Bloch
 <kev@codingthat.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: maximum for auto_explain.log_min_duration doesn't seem to make
 sense
Message-ID: <20180223133627.33672e01@engels>
In-Reply-To: <16575.1519413959@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <8ea82d7e-cb78-8e05-0629-73aa14d2a0ca@codingthat.com>
	<CAKFQuwaPyFHN=cmEhOYdd2R5daZP2Wn0og9M8BEPE5k_tuQYjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<16575.1519413959@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:25:59 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:


> INT_MAX.  As to whether it's worth doing, the existing limit is equivalent
> to ~35 minutes if I did the math right.  I can barely imagine that anyone
> would want to set auto_explain.log_min_duration higher than that, but
> maybe in some huge data warehouse environment it'd make sense.

> In short, seems like a valid complaint to me.

A client has several production queries that commonly run an hour or two.
Sometimes queries are modified infelicitously or the planner is lead astray
due to statistics etc and they can run much longer unexpectedly. It would be
useful to set a threshold of a few hours to catch those as reproducing them
is a slow process.

-dg

-- 
David Gould                                   daveg@sonic.net
If simplicity worked, the world would be overrun with insects.