Re: pgbench patches

From: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgbench patches
Date: 2013-07-11 00:16:04
Message-ID: 20130711.091604.1302405232495877442.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Hello Tatsuo,
>
>> I have looked into this:
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1105
>> because it's marked as "Ready for committer". However I noticed that
>> you worried about other pgbench patches such as
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1103 .
>>
>>> So I would like to know whether the throttling patch is committed and
>>> then update the progress patch to take that into account.
>>
>> Shall I wait for your pgbench --throttle patch becomes ready for
>> committer?
>
> No. I'll submit another patch to the next commitfest to improve the
> progress behavior under throttling, if & when both initial patches are
> committed.

Ok, so I looked into the progress patch. One thing I noticed was:

case 'P':
progress = atoi(optarg);
if (progress <= 0)
{
fprintf(stderr,
"thread progress delay (-P) must not be negative (%s)\n",
optarg);
exit(1);
}
break;

For me, the error message is not quite right, because progress == 0
case is considered error as well in your patch. I sugges you change
the error message something like:

"thread progress delay (-P) must be positive number (%s)\n",
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2013-07-11 00:58:17 Re: Bugfix and new feature for PGXS
Previous Message Sean Chittenden 2013-07-10 23:58:07 Re: [SPAM] SSL renegotiation