Re: Patch to show individual statement latencies in pgbench output

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to show individual statement latencies in pgbench output
Date: 2010-08-12 17:48:53
Message-ID: 2016.1281635333@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Florian Pflug wrote:
>> Attached is an updated version (v4).

> I've attached a v5. No real code changes from Florian's version, just
> some wording/style fixes and rework on the documentation.

I'm looking through this patch now. It looks mostly good, but I am
wondering just exactly what is the rationale for adding comment
statements to the data structures, rather than ignoring them as before.
It seems like a complete waste of logic, memory space, and cycles;
moreover it renders the documentation's statement that comments
"are ignored" incorrect. I did not find anything in the patch history
explaining the point of that change.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2010-08-12 18:02:44 Re: review: xml_is_well_formed
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-08-12 17:29:57 Re: including backend ID in relpath of temp rels - updated patch