Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Suggested change to pgbench

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Suggested change to pgbench
Date: 2002-10-07 05:04:25
Message-ID: 20021007.140425.78704131.t-ishii@sra.co.jp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
I have applied your patches plus an fprintf to see if PQisBusy()
actually returns true. Then ran pgbench with -c 128 -t 100. So far I
could not see any evidence that PQisBusy() returns true.

> I think pgbench is not dealing with asynchronous input quite right.
> As written, if the backend sends a response that doesn't fit into
> a single TCP packet, pgbench will go into a tight loop of
> PQisBusy/PQconsumeInput, which will not exit until the rest of the
> response arrives.  This would degrade the reported performance, first
> because of the wasted CPU cycles, and second because other connections
> wouldn't get serviced during that interval.

> I haven't done enough tests to be sure that that isn't just a chance
> variation, but I recommend changing the code as below anyway.

Ok, I will commit your changes. Thanks.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

In response to

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Justin CliftDate: 2002-10-07 10:21:23
Subject: Re: Suggested change to pgbench
Previous:From: Aaron MulderDate: 2002-10-07 01:26:02
Subject: DBMD Patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group