Re: Avoid stuck of pbgench due to skipped transactions

On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 16:06:10 +0900
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 08:47:40 +0200 (CEST)
> Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:

> > > I attached the fixed patch that uses return instead of break, and I confirmed
> > > that this made the progress reporting work property.
> >
> > I'm hesitating to do such a strictural change for a degenerate case linked
> > to "insane" parameters, as pg is unlikely to reach 100 million tps, ever.
> > It seems to me enough that the command is not blocked in such cases.
>
> Sure. The change from "break" to "return" is just for making the progress
> reporting work in the loop, as you mentioned. However, my original intention
> is avoiding stuck in a corner-case where a unrealistic parameter was used, and
> I agree with you that this change　is not so necessary for handling such a
> special situation.

I attached the v2 patch to clarify that I withdrew the v3 patch.

Regards
Yugo Nagata

--
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>