From: | "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Fabien COELHO' <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: pgbench: option delaying queries till connections establishment? |
Date: | 2020-11-11 11:11:48 |
Message-ID: | OSBPR01MB3157F335F242DBCDBC09DF82F5E80@OSBPR01MB3157.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Fabien,
> Usually I run many pgbench through scripts, so I'm probably not there to
> check a lone stderr failure at the beginning if performance figures are
> actually reported.
> I can remove the line, but I strongly believe that reporting performance
> figures if some client connection failed thus the bench could not run as
> prescribed is a bad behavior. The good news is that it is probably quite
> unlikely. So I'd prefer to keep it and possibly submit a patch to change
> the behavior.
I agree such a situation is very bad, and I understood you have a plan to
submit patches for fix it. If so leaving lines as a TODO is OK.
> Should be this one: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/30/2624/
This discussion is still on-going, but I can see that the starting time
may be delayed for looking up all pgbench-variables.
(I think the status of this thread might be wrong. it should be
'Needs review,' but now 'Waiting on Author.')
This patch is mostly good and can change a review status soon,
however, I think it should wait that related patch.
Please discuss how to fix it with Tom, and this will commit soon.
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vik Fearing | 2020-11-11 11:43:40 | Re: Clean up optional rules in grammar |
Previous Message | Ajin Cherian | 2020-11-11 10:59:46 | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |