From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgbench stats per script & other stuff |
Date: | 2016-01-27 15:21:16 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.10.1601271325140.12620@sto |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello again,
>> Obviously this would work. I did not think the special case was worth the
>> extra argument. This one has some oddity too, because the second argument is
>> ignored depending on the third. Do as you feel.
>
> Actually my question was whether keeping the original start_time was the
> intended design.
Sorry I misunderstood the question.
The answer is essentially yes, the field is needed for the "aggregated"
mode where this specific behavior is used.
However, after some look at the code I think that it is possible to do
without.
I also spotted an small issue under low tps where the last aggregation was
not shown.
With the attached version these problems have been removed, no conditional
initialization. There is also a small diff with the version you sent.
--
Fabien.
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pgbench-script-stats-15-b.patch | text/x-diff | 32.3 KB |
14b-to-15b.patch | text/x-diff | 3.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dilip Kumar | 2016-01-27 15:27:00 | Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex |
Previous Message | Jinhua Luo | 2016-01-27 15:18:20 | Re: insert/update performance |