Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench

From: Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rintaro Ikeda <ikedarintarof(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "slpmcf(at)gmail(dot)com" <slpmcf(at)gmail(dot)com>, "boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com" <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Srinath Reddy Sadipiralla <srinath2133(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench
Date: 2025-09-26 02:52:34
Message-ID: 20250926115234.962c12ce997bee78883a0c3f@sraoss.co.jp
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 25 Sep 2025 10:27:44 +0200
Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The patch looks good, I've spotted some typos in the doc.
>
> + Allows clients to continue their run even if an SQL statement
> fails due to
> + errors other than serialization or deadlock. Unlike
> serialization and deadlock
> + failures, clients do not retry the same transactions but
> start new transaction.
>
> Should be "but start a new transaction.", although "proceed to the
> next transaction." may be clearer here that ?
>
> + number of transactions that got a SQL error
> + (zero unless <option>--failures-detailed</option> is specified)
>
> It seems like both "a SQL" and "an SQL" are used in the codebase and
> doc, but this page only uses "an SQL", so using "an SQL" may be better
> for consistency.
>
> + If an SQL command fails due to serialization or deadlock errors, the
> + client does not aborted, regardless of whether
>
> Should be "the client does not abort."

Thank you for your review.
I've attached the updated patch in my previous post in this thread.

By the way, on the pgsql-hackers list, top-posting is generally discouraged [1],
so replying below the quoted messages is usually preferred.

[1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists

Regards,
Yugo Nagata

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chao Li 2025-09-26 02:54:02 Re: Mark ItemPointer arguments as const thoughoutly
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-09-26 02:49:43 Re: Remove unused for_all_tables field from AlterPublicationStmt