pgbadger | A fast PostgreSQL Log Analyzer
kandi X-RAY | pgbadger Summary
kandi X-RAY | pgbadger Summary
pgBadger is a PostgreSQL log analyzer built for speed providing fully detailed reports based on your PostgreSQL log files. It's a small standalone Perl script that outperforms any other PostgreSQL log analyzer. It is written in pure Perl and uses a JavaScript library (flotr2) to draw graphs so that you don't need to install any additional Perl modules or other packages. Furthermore, this library gives us more features such as zooming. pgBadger also uses the Bootstrap JavaScript library and the FontAwesome webfont for better design. Everything is embedded.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of pgbadger
pgbadger Key Features
pgbadger Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on pgbadger
QUESTION
When run with this command, pgbadger finds no queries, even though there are slow queries logged in the database log.
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Apr-15 at 08:08The problem was passing the --dbname
flag and its argument. The log prefix '%m [%p] '
does not include the database name, so pgbadger
, presumably, is unable to find any statements logged against the provided database name and reports accordingly.
The solution is to either not pass --dbname
or modify the log prefix in postgresql.conf
to include the database name (for example '%m [%p] %d '
), reload the server config and wait for new entries in the log.
I found this on an Openstack Fedora vm, where '%m [%p] '
was the default log prefix.
QUESTION
I am trying to parse the log file generated by my RDS instance using pgBadger
, so far with no results.
The log_line_prefix is set to %t:%r:%u@%d:[%p]:
A sample line in the log file looks like :
...ANSWER
Answered 2019-Oct-07 at 18:21If this is pgBadger 11.1 or newer, you can try using --format rds
and remove --prefix
. I guess this is a new bug that needs to be reported, but at least --format rds
worked for me.
QUESTION
I'm conducting an audit of how much existing database tables are used and by what users as part of a database cleanup effort. Using the log files seems like a natural way to get at this data. We have pgBadger running for performance reports but a usage report as I've described doesn't exist. Does anyone know of a tool (pgBadger or otherwise) that will extract table and user information from the logs so that I can calculate summary stats on it? I'd like to leverage existing tools rather than rolling my own log parser.
...ANSWER
Answered 2018-Sep-13 at 03:38I endup writing a hacky log parser.
QUESTION
We can do a different kind of analysis like slowest/time consuming/Most frequent queries in MongoDB. Is there any tool which will do that for me like PgBadger.
...ANSWER
Answered 2018-Mar-07 at 01:23The closest counterpart of PgBadger in MongoDB would be mtools, which is also a log analyzer.
Please see https://github.com/rueckstiess/mtools for downloads and information about mtools.
The main difference between PgBadger and mtools is that mtools is not a single tool, but a collection of tools to analyze MongoDB logs.
QUESTION
We're just starting to investigate using Postgres as the backend for our system which will be used with an OLTP-type workload: > 95% (possibly >99%) of the transactions will be inserting 1 row into 4 separate tables, or updating 1 row. Our test machine is running 9.5.6 (using out-of-the-box config options) on a modest cloud-hosted Windows VM with a 4-core i7 processor, with a conventional 7200 RPM disk. This is much, much slower than our targeted production hardware, but useful right now for finding bottlenecks in our basic design.
Our initial tests have been pretty discouraging. Although the insert statements themselves run fairly quickly (combined execution time is around 2ms), the overall transaction time is around 40ms, due to the commit statement taking 38 ms. Furthermore, during a simple 3-minute load test (5000 transactions), we're only seeing about 30 transactions per second, with pgbadger reporting 3 minutes spent in "commit" (38 ms avg.), and the next highest statements being the inserts at 10 (2ms) and 3 (0.6 ms) respectively. During this test, the cpu on the postgres instance is pegged at 100%
The fact that the time spent in commit is equal to the elapsed time of the test tells me the that not only is commit serialized (unsurprising, given the relatively slow disk on this system), but that it is consuming a cpu during that duration, which surprises me. I would have assumed before the fact that if we were i/o bound, we would be seeing very low cpu usage, not high usage.
In doing a bit of reading, it would appear that using Asynchronous Commits would solve a lot of these issues, but with the caveat of data loss on crashes/immediate shutdown. Similarly, grouping transactions together into a single begin/commit block, or using multi-row insert syntax improves throughput as well.
All of these options are possible for us to employ, but in a traditional OLTP application, none of them would be (you need to have fast, atomic, synchronous transactions). 35 transactions per second on a 4-core box would have unacceptable 20 years ago on other RDBMs running on much slower hardware than this test machine, which makes me think that we're doing this wrong, as I'm sure Postgres is capable of handling much higher workloads.
I've looked around but can't find some common-sense config options that would serve as starting points for tuning a Postgres instance. Any suggestions?
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Apr-03 at 13:36If COMMIT
is your time hog, that probably means:
Your system honors the
FlushFileBuffers
system call, which is as it should be.Your I/O is miserably slow.
You can test this by setting fsync = off
in postgresql.conf
– but don't ever do this on a production system. If that improves performance a lot, you know that your I/O system is very slow when it actually has to write data to disk.
There is nothing that PostgreSQL (or any other reliable database) can improve here without sacrificing data durability.
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install pgbadger
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page