From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Avoid stuck of pbgench due to skipped transactions |
Date: | 2021-09-08 14:40:35 |
Message-ID: | ad80113e-1713-ccb2-3d9e-95fc9a46e112@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021/09/07 18:24, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Fujii-san,
>
>> Stop counting skipped transactions under -T as soon as the timer is exceeded. Because otherwise it can take a very long time to count all of them especially when quite a lot of them happen with unrealistically high rate setting in -R, which would prevent pgbench from ending immediately. Because of this behavior, note that there is no guarantee that all skipped transactions are counted under -T though there is under -t. This is OK in practice because it's very unlikely to happen with realistic setting.
>
> Ok, I find this text quite clear.
Thanks for the check! So attached is the updated version of the patch.
>> One question is; which version do we want to back-patch to?
>
> If we consider it a "very minor bug fix" which is triggered by somehow unrealistic options, so I'd say 14 & dev, or possibly only dev.
Agreed. Since it's hard to imagine the issue happens in practice,
we don't need to bother back-patch to the stable branches.
So I'm thinking to commit the patch to 15dev and 14.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pgbench-stuck-3.patch | text/plain | 2.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Wu Haotian | 2021-09-08 14:41:28 | Re: Add option --drop-cascade for pg_dump/restore |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-09-08 14:28:53 | Re: Bug in query rewriter - hasModifyingCTE not getting set |