Re: pgbench -f and vacuum

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench -f and vacuum
Date: 2014-12-14 00:50:16
Message-ID: 548CDEC8.4080208@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/13/14, 6:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Problem with "-f implies -n" approach is, it breaks backward
> compatibility. There are use cases using custom script*and* pgbench_*
> tables. For example the particular user wants to use the standard
> pgbench tables and is not satisfied with the built in scenario. I know
> at least one user does this way.

If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or check for the existence of the tables before attempting to vacuum. Since there's no way to squelch in the server logfile, I think checking for the table is the right answer.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2014-12-14 00:56:59 Re: [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2014-12-14 00:46:41 Re: split builtins.h to quote.h