Re: pgbench--new transaction type

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgbench--new transaction type
Date: 2012-06-20 19:54:06
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On 20.06.2012 21:41, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> On 20 June 2012 18:42, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>  wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 3:48 AM, Simon Riggs<simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>> I'm sure Jeff submitted this because of the need for a standard test,
>>>> rather than the wish to actually modify pgbench itself.
>>>> Can I suggest that we include a list of standard scripts with pgbench
>>>> for this purpose? These can then be copied alongside the binary when
>>>> we do an install.
>>> I was thinking along similar lines myself.  At the least, I think we
>>> can't continue to add a short option for every new test type.
>>> Instead, maybe we could have --test-type=WHATEVER, and perhaps that
>>> then reads whatever.sql from some compiled-in directory.  That would
>>> allow us to sanely support a moderately large number of tests.
> We could call the --test-type option -f, and the "compiled-in directory"
> could be the current directory ;-).

Well, that sounds a lot like "let's reject the patch". Which would be
OK with me, I guess, but if the goal is to make it easy for all
developers to run that particular test, I'm not sure that's getting us

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-06-20 20:02:15 Re: pg_prewarm
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-06-20 19:53:43 Re: pg_prewarm