| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomáš Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench -f and vacuum |
| Date: | 2015-05-12 16:23:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZf6ngRjjL4EsbE7i15p5hBfgm-ZJt_zmNBXtvVvDXn9A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> It's says:
>>
>> starting vacuum.... ERROR: blah
>> ERROR: blah
>> ERROR: blah
>> done
>>
>> And then continues on. Sure, that's not the greatest error reporting
>> output ever, but what do you expect from pgbench? I think it's clear
>> enough what's going on there. The messages appear in quick
>> succession, because it doesn't take very long to notice that the table
>> isn't there, so it's not like you are sitting there going "wait,
>> what?".
>>
>> If we're going to add something, I like your second suggestion
>> "(ignoring this error and continuing anyway)" more than the first one.
>> Putting "ignoring:" before the thing you plan to ignore will be
>> confusing, I think.
>
> +1 to adding "(ignoring this error and continuing anyway)" and
> committing this.
You want to take care of that?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-05-12 16:23:47 | Re: pgbench -f and vacuum |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-05-12 16:08:26 | Re: pgbench -f and vacuum |