| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Giuseppe Broccolo <giuseppe(dot)broccolo(at)2ndquadrant(dot)it>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench |
| Date: | 2013-10-03 16:55:28 |
| Message-ID: | 45219.1380819328@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Multiline SQL commands are not supported? Well that sucks, because only
> BUFSIZ chars are read from each line. In my platform that's 8192, but
> maybe in Sime's case it's shorter .. or maybe his query really is
> longer than 8192 bytes.
> This smells like a pgbench bug to me.
Yeah, I ran into that line-length limit in pgbench a couple months ago.
We really oughta remove the restriction; seems like that shouldn't be
hard.
I'm less enthused about introducing a multiline-command feature; that'd
require inventing some escape syntax that's not there now, and making it
100% backwards compatible might be hard.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2013-10-03 17:27:15 | Comparing Oracle vs Postgres Fwd: [ADMIN] Database replication to 50-80 nodes |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-10-03 15:50:55 | Re: pgbench |