Re: [HACKERS] pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Bugs List <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error
Date: 2016-03-17 13:41:34
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYQWDRobXm=ds7XY8+OvD687L30JPGAh6A5_eGzBXaw=A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> 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".
>
> -1 for removing it. I found myself in need of it just a couple of days
> back when testing the GSSAPI encryption patch with a read-only quick
> load to test if the patch was robust enough to handle a mountain of
> connection attempts.

I've used it, too.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ritanjali M 2016-03-17 13:48:32 Help
Previous Message srivathson.k 2016-03-17 13:39:38 BUG #14028: FATAL: cannot perform encoding conversion outside a transaction

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-03-17 13:54:45 Re: Pushdown target list below gather node (WAS Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-03-17 13:40:50 Re: Pushdown target list below gather node (WAS Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification)