From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgbench unusable after crash during pgbench |
Date: | 2015-11-19 16:58:40 |
Message-ID: | 10341.1447952320@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> writes:
> On 19 November 2015 at 16:11, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> The only explanation I can think of here is that pgbench on startup
>> queries one of the tables to figure out the scale factor, and it seems
>> to be coming up with scaling factor 0, suggesting that the table was
>> perhaps truncated. If the tables are unlogged, that's expected.
>> Otherwise, it sounds like a serious bug in recovery.
> Actually yes, that's something I appear to have omitted. I was using
> unlogged tables, which makes sense now.
> Even so, the errors generated are not at all helpful, and I would
> expect pgbench to handle this case explicitly.
Meh ... it's not very clear how to improve that. The ":scale" variable is
set from "select count(*) from pgbench_branches"; it's not immediately
obvious that zero should not be an allowed result. Then the :scale value
is used as the upper limit in a \setrandom script command, and the
complaint about that seems fairly on point.
I do agree that pgbench could do more in the way of showing you the script
command (and line number, maybe) that failed. Patches welcome.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-11-19 18:39:22 | Re: COPY (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE .. RETURNING ..) |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2015-11-19 16:57:18 | Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL |