From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Unfortunate choice of short switch name in pgbench |
Date: | 2014-02-25 19:49:08 |
Message-ID: | 18939.1393357748@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I just wasted some time puzzling over strange results from pgbench.
I eventually realized that I'd been testing against the wrong server,
because rather than "-p 65432" I'd typed "-P 65432", thereby invoking
the recently added --progress option. pgbench has no way to know that
that isn't what I meant; the fact that both switches take integer
arguments doesn't help.
To fix this, I propose removing the -P short form and only allowing the
long --progress form. I won't argue that this feature is completely
useless, but for sure it's not something I'd want more often than once
in a blue moon. So I think it does not need to have a short form; and
for sure it doesn't need a short form that's so easily confused with a
commonly used switch.
If no objections, I'll go make that change.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeremy Harris | 2014-02-25 19:55:08 | Re: Minor performance improvement in transition to external sort |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-02-25 19:39:06 | Re: Changeset Extraction v7.7 |