Re: [PATCH] pgbench log file headers

From: Adam Hendel <adam(at)tembo(dot)io>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pgbench log file headers
Date: 2023-11-15 14:16:20
Message-ID: CABfuTgiou00261Mt5P3MHQ4fiw50EN793C=+T5yHJtQBpBvEVw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello

On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 6:01 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2023-11-13 11:55:07 -0600, Adam Hendel wrote:
> > Currently, pgbench will log individual transactions to a logfile when the
> > `--log` parameter flag is provided. The logfile, however, does not
> include
> > column header. It has become a fairly standard expectation of users to
> have
> > column headers present in flat files. Without the header in the pgbench
> log
> > files, new users must navigate to the docs and piece together the column
> > headers themselves. Most industry leading frameworks have tooling built
> in
> > to read column headers though, for example python/pandas read_csv().
>
> The disadvantage of doing that is that a single pgbench run with --log will
> generate many files when using -j, to avoid contention. The easiest way to
> deal with that after the run is to cat all the log files to a larger one.
> If
> you do that with headers present, you obviously have a few bogus rows (the
> heades from the various files).
>
> I guess you could avoid the "worst" of that by documenting that the
> combined
> log file should be built by
> cat {$log_prefix}.${pid} {$log_prefix}.${pid}.*
> and only outputting the header in the file generated by the main thread.
>
>
> We can improve the experience for users by adding column headers to
> pgbench
> > logfiles with an optional command line flag, `--log-header`. This will
> keep
> > the API backwards compatible by making users opt-in to the column
> headers.
> > It follows the existing pattern of having conditional flags in pgbench’s
> > API; the `--log` option would have both –log-prefix and –log-header if
> this
> > work is accepted.
>
> > The implementation considers the column headers only when the
> > `--log-header` flag is present. The values for the columns are taken
> > directly from the “Per-Transaction Logging” section in
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/pgbench.html and takes into
> account
> > the conditional columns `schedule_lag` and `retries`.
> >
> >
> > Below is an example of what that logfile will look like:
> >
> >
> > pgbench postgres://postgres:postgres(at)localhost:5432/postgres --log
> > --log-header
> >
> > client_id transaction_no time script_no time_epoch time_us
>
> Independent of your patch, but we imo ought to combine time_epoch time_us
> in
> the log output. There's no point in forcing consumers to combine those
> fields,
> and it makes logging more expensive... And if we touch this, we should
> just
> switch to outputting nanoseconds instead of microseconds.
>
> It also is quite odd that we have "time" and "time_epoch", "time_us", where
> time is the elapsed time of an individual "transaction" and time_epoch +
> time_us together are a wall-clock timestamp. Without differentiating
> between
> those, the column headers seem not very useful, because one needs to look
> in
> the documentation to understand the fields.

> I don't think there's all that strong a need for backward compatibility in
> pgbench. We could just change the columns as I suggest above and then
> always
> emit the header in the "main" log file.
>
>
Do you think this should be done in separate patches?

First patch: log the column headers in the "main" log file. No --log-header
flag, make it the default behavior of --log.

Next patch: collapse "time_epoch" and "time_us" in the log output and give
the "time" column a name that is more clear.

Adam

> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-11-15 14:25:22 Re: Allow tests to pass in OpenSSL FIPS mode
Previous Message Jakub Wartak 2023-11-15 14:13:32 Re: trying again to get incremental backup