On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 01:18:51PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > This should make the output clearer to eyeball for problems --- a good
> > > timing has a high percentage on the first line, rather than on the last
> > > line.
> > I guess I'm not sure the output format is an improvement. I wouldn't
> > care much one way or the other if we had made this change at the time
> > in AS92, but I'm not sure it's really worth breaking compatibility for
> > a format that may or may not be any better. The person who wrote the
> > original code presumably preferred it way it already is.
> He wrote it that way to allow for simpler C code --- he could just start
> from 31 and keeping skipping entries until he hit a non-zero.
> My format makes it easy to see which line should have the majority of
> the entries, e.g. first line should be > 90%. I doubt there are enough
> people running this cross-version that consistency in output makes any
> difference between major PG versions.
The real weird part is that this tool outputs a variable number of
rows/buckets, depending on the hightest non-zero bucket, so I had
trouble understanding it when the last line was the one to look at,
especially for multiple runs.
Also, we heavily adjusted the output of pg_test_fsync for several major
releases and that wasn't a problem for anyone.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-08-27 17:40:40|
|Subject: Re: temporal support patch|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2012-08-27 17:28:09|
|Subject: Re: spinlocks on HP-UX|