On 30 Srpen 2012, 18:02, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Tomas Vondra <t...@fuzzy.cz> wrote:
>> This patch is a bit less polished (and more complex) than the other
>> pgbench patch I've sent a while back, and I'm not sure how to handle the
>> Windows branch. That needs to be fixed during the commit fest.
> What's the problem with the Windows branch?

Well, there are comments about how timestamp does not work on Windows
(filling 0), and I'm not sure how that affects the patch (e.g. determining
the aggregation interval). I have no Windows workstation available so I
can't actually try that.

> Could you un-cuddle your brances to follow the PostgreSQL style, omit
> braces around single-statement blocks, and remove the spurious
> whitespace changes?

OK, will do.

> Instead of having both use_log_agg and naggseconds, I think you can
> get by with just having a single variable that is zero if aggregation
> is not in use and is otherwise the aggregation period.  On a related
> note, you can't specify -A without an associated value, so there is no
> point in documenting a "default".  As with your other patch, I suggest
> using a long option name like --latency-aggregate-interval and then
> making the name of the variable in the code match the option name,
> with s/-/_/g, for clarity.

Why --latency-aggregate-interval? It has nothing to do with latencies,
it's merely number of transactions per interval.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to