| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Rady, Doug" <radydoug(at)amazon(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: pgbench - option to build using ppoll() for larger connection counts |
| Date: | 2018-08-09 21:46:10 |
| Message-ID: | 98fd9aa2-f5f0-d872-902f-c217cae1eed3@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/09/2018 12:45 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 07/03/2018 07:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 05/17/2018 01:23 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 9:23 AM, Rady, Doug <radydoug(at)amazon(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> pgbench11-ppoll-v12.patch
>>> Hi Doug,
>>>
>>> FYI this patch is trying and failing to use ppoll() on Windows:
>>>
>>> https://ci.appveyor.com/project/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/build/1.0.30
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's still failing - see
>> <https://ci.appveyor.com/project/postgresql-cfbot/postgresql/build/1.0.4098>
>>
>> I'm setting this back to "Waiting on Author" until that's fixed.
>>
>
>
> The author hasn't replied, but the attached seems to have cured the
> bitrot so that it at least applies. Let's see what the cfbot makes of
> it and then possibly fix any Windows issues.
>
>
>
And there's still a Windows problem which I think is cured in the
attached patch
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pgbench-ppoll-v14.patch | text/x-patch | 10.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-08-09 22:00:25 | Commitfest 2018-07 WOA items |
| Previous Message | Vik Fearing | 2018-08-09 21:35:56 | Re: Typo in doc or wrong EXCLUDE implementation |