From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr, ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org, tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error |
Date: | 2016-03-17 22:52:25 |
Message-ID: | 20160318.075225.389580264244338997.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
> It's certainly a bug that the combination of the switches doesn't work,
> and I already fixed it (47211af17a). My question was more towards
> whether -C is a useful benchmarking option at all. I cannot imagine
> a situation in which, if someone said "I'm doing only one transaction per
> session, and I have a performance problem", I would not answer "yes,
> and you just explained why".
You could use -f option to execute multiple transactions in a session
using a custom script file.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-03-17 23:17:56 | Re: BUG #14030: BRIN doc bug |
Previous Message | Erik Rijkers | 2016-03-17 21:16:45 | pgbench confused between service + PGPORT |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2016-03-17 22:59:27 | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-03-17 22:46:34 | Re: Improve error handling in pltcl |