| From: | Marina Polyakova <m(dot)polyakova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors |
| Date: | 2017-07-14 13:48:29 |
| Message-ID: | 66193a3704fe466e0ef4812302712bc8@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Given that the number of variables of a pgbench script is expected to
> be pretty small, I'm not sure that the sorting stuff is worth the
> effort.
I think it is a good insurance if there're many variables..
> My suggestion is really to look at both implementations and to answer
> the question "should pgbench share its variable implementation with
> psql?".
>
> If the answer is yes, then the relevant part of the implementation
> should be moved to fe_utils, and that's it.
>
> If the answer is no, then implement something in pgbench directly.
The structure of variables is different, the container structure of the
variables is different, so I think that the answer is no.
--
Marina Polyakova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2017-07-14 14:21:09 | Re: SCRAM auth and Pgpool-II |
| Previous Message | Marina Polyakova | 2017-07-14 13:41:49 | Re: WIP Patch: Pgbench Serialization and deadlock errors |