From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz |
Cc: | coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr, rulyox(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Error on pgbench logs |
Date: | 2021-06-11 06:56:55 |
Message-ID: | 20210611.155655.1369834005135867832.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Fri, 11 Jun 2021 15:23:41 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:29:30PM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > + /* flush remaining stats */
> > + if (!logged && latency == 0.0)
> > + logAgg(logfile, agg);
>
> You are right, this is missing the final stats. Why the choice of
> latency here for the check? That's just to make the difference
> between the case where doLog() is called while processing the
> benchmark for the end of the transaction and the case where doLog() is
> called once a thread ends, no? Wouldn't it be better to do a final
> push of the states once a thread reaches CSTATE_FINISHED or
> CSTATE_ABORTED instead?
Doesn't threadRun already doing that?
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-06-11 06:56:56 | Re: Added missing tab completion for alter subscription set option |
Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2021-06-11 06:32:28 | Re: Duplicate history file? |