| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, rulyox(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Error on pgbench logs |
| Date: | 2021-06-16 07:49:43 |
| Message-ID: | YMmtF99m8gm4d4+5@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 08:58:17AM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Actually it would work if both are mixed: the code would aggregate a sample.
> However it does not look very useful to do that, so it is arbitrary
> forbidden. Not sure whether this is that useful to prevent this use case.
Okay, noted.
> Attached v4 improves comments and moves tx as an assert.
Thanks. I have not tested in details but that looks rather sane to me
at quick glance. I'll look at that more tomorrow.
> + * The function behaviors changes depending on sample_rate (a fraction of
> + * transaction is reported) and agg_interval (transactions are aggregated
> + * over the interval and reported once).
The first part of this sentence has an incorrect grammar.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-06-16 07:52:11 | Re: detailed error message of pg_waldump |
| Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2021-06-16 07:27:45 | Re: Skip partition tuple routing with constant partition key |