OK, I've committed the fix for the -T part. It didn't back-patch
cleanly, and it is a minor bug, so I'm not inclined to worry about it
further.
I agree that it is a very minor bug and not necessary worth back-patching.
I didn't commit the fix for the -P part, because Alvaro objected to
the
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:12 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Fabien COELHO
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> - when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
>>>time (i.e. do not wait for a transaction beyond the end
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
- when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
time (i.e. do not wait for a transaction beyond the end of the run).
Every other place where doCustom() returns false is implemented as
return
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> - when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
>time (i.e. do not wait for a transaction beyond the end of the run).
Every other place where doCustom() returns false is implemented as
return
You're probably right, but TBH I'm pretty unsure about this whole thing.
If the question is "is there a bug", then answer is yes. The progress report
may disappear if thread 0 happens to stop, even of all other threads go on.
Obviously it only concerns slow queries, but there is no reason why
Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> >>Probably it is possible, but it will sure need more that one little
> >>condition to be achieved... I do not think that introducing a non trivial
> >>distributed election algorithm involving locks and so would be a good
> >>decision for this very little matter.
> >>
>
Probably it is possible, but it will sure need more that one little
condition to be achieved... I do not think that introducing a non trivial
distributed election algorithm involving locks and so would be a good
decision for this very little matter.
My advice is "keep it simple".
If this is a
Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Probably it is possible, but it will sure need more that one little
> condition to be achieved... I do not think that introducing a non trivial
> distributed election algorithm involving locks and so would be a good
> decision for this very little matter.
>
> My advice is
Hello Alvaro,
Attached is a v3 which test integers more logically. I'm a lazy
programmer who tends to minimize the number of key strokes.
Well. From what I can tell this patch is Ready for Committer.
I'm not a fan of this approach either. Would it be too complicated if
we had a global
Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> > Attached is a v3 which test integers more logically. I'm a lazy
> > programmer who tends to minimize the number of key strokes.
>
> Well. From what I can tell this patch is Ready for Committer.
I'm not a fan of this approach either. Would it be too complicated if
> Attached is a v3 which test integers more logically. I'm a lazy
> programmer who tends to minimize the number of key strokes.
Well. From what I can tell this patch is Ready for Committer.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
Hello Aleksander,
Thanks for the look at the patch.
time pgbench -T 5 -R 0.1 -P 1 -c 2 -j 2
On my laptop this command executes 25 seconds instead of 5.
I'm pretty sure it IS a bug. Probably a minor one though.
Sure.
[...] you should probably write:
if(someint > 0)
Ok.
if(somebool
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Aleksander Alekseev
wrote:
>> time pgbench -T 5 -R 0.1 -P 1 -c 2 -j 2
>
> On my laptop this command executes 25 seconds instead of 5. I'm pretty
> sure it IS a bug. Probably a minor one though.
>
> I tested this patch on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS
> time pgbench -T 5 -R 0.1 -P 1 -c 2 -j 2
On my laptop this command executes 25 seconds instead of 5. I'm pretty
sure it IS a bug. Probably a minor one though.
I tested this patch on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS with GCC 4.8. It applies
cleanly on master branch (c7111d11) and solves a described problem.
No
Hello Robert,
> While testing for something else I encountered two small bugs under very low
> rate (--rate=0.1). The attached patches fixes these.
>
> - when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
>time (i.e. do
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> While testing for something else I encountered two small bugs under very low
> rate (--rate=0.1). The attached patches fixes these.
>
> - when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
>time
While testing for something else I encountered two small bugs under very
low rate (--rate=0.1). The attached patches fixes these.
- when a duration (-T) is specified, ensure that pgbench ends at that
time (i.e. do not wait for a transaction beyond the end of the run).
- when there is a
17 matches
Mail list logo