Re: Testing with concurrent sessions

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Testing with concurrent sessions
Date: 2010-01-07 16:58:30
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 08:40:28PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> A parallel psql seems to me a better way to go. We talked about that
> a while ago, but I don't recall what happened to it.

Greg Stark had a patch a couple of years ago. Dunno what happened to
it since then.

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres:

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2010-01-07 16:58:52 Re: Hot Standy introduced problem with query cancel behavior
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-01-07 16:58:14 Re: Patch: Allow substring/replace() to get/set bit values