| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench --tuple-size option |
| Date: | 2014-08-15 10:24:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20140815102419.GI28805@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-08-15 12:17:31 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> >>>I don't think it's beneficial to put this into pgbench. There really
> >>>isn't a relevant benefit over using a custom script here.
> >>
> >>The scripts to run are the standard ones. The difference is in the
> >>*initialization* phase (-i), namely the filler attribute size. There is no
> >>custom script for initialization in pgbench, so ISTM that this argument does
> >>not apply here.
> >
> >The custom initialization is to run a manual ALTER after the
> >initialization.
>
> Sure, it can be done this way.
>
> I'm not sure about the implication of ALTER on the table storage,
Should be fine in this case. But if that's what you're concerned about -
understandably - it seems to make more sense to split -i into two. One
to create the tables, and another to fill them. That'd allow to do
manual stuff inbetween.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-08-15 11:17:38 | Re: Function to know last log write timestamp |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2014-08-15 10:17:31 | Re: pgbench --tuple-size option |