| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench - use pg logging capabilities |
| Date: | 2020-01-10 04:08:44 |
| Message-ID: | 20200110040844.GG1702@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 08:09:29PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> TBH, my recommendation would be to drop *all* of these likely()
> and unlikely() calls. What evidence have you got that those are
> meaningfully improving the quality of the generated code? And if
> they're buried inside macros, they certainly aren't doing anything
> useful in terms of documenting the code.
Yes. I am wondering if we should not rework this part of the logging
with something like the attached. My 2c, thoughts welcome.
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| log-level-stuff.patch | text/x-diff | 3.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2020-01-10 04:44:05 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2020-01-10 04:01:31 | Re: logical decoding : exceeded maxAllocatedDescs for .spill files |