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

Re: too much pgbench init output

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: too much pgbench init output
Date: 2013-01-07 02:29:42
Message-ID: 20130107.112942.1707802429128366952.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>>> AFAIK the "5 second" logging is much quieter in most cases (and a bit
>>> more verbose when the initialization gets very slower), so I think the
>>> "quiet" logging is not a bad match although maybe there's a better name.
>>>
>>> This change (adding the elapsed/remaining fields to the original loggin)
>>> would be consistent with this name, because considering a single line,
>>> the "-q" is more verbose right now.
>>>
>>> So I'd stick with the "-q" option and added the fields to the original
>>> logging. But I'm not opposing a different name, I just can't think of a
>>> better one.
>> 
>> Ok, I'm with you ("-q" and along with adding the elapsed/remaining
>> fields to the original logging).
> 
> Great, attached is a patch that does that.

Committed. Thanks.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-07 02:48:56
Subject: Re: question: foreign key constraints and AccessExclusive locks
Previous:From: Jon NelsonDate: 2013-01-07 02:22:31
Subject: Re: question: foreign key constraints and AccessExclusive locks

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