Indeed. It doesn't look that hard: AFAICS the problem is just that
process_sql_command() is making premature decisions about whether to
extract parameters from the SQL commands. Proposed patch attached.
Great. Patch looks good to me.
Too me as well: code looks ok, patch applies, compiles,
>> Not really objecting, but an even better fix might be to remove the
>> restriction on the order in which the options can be specified.
>
> Indeed. It doesn't look that hard: AFAICS the problem is just that
> process_sql_command() is making premature decisions about whether to
> extract paramet
> Not really objecting, but an even better fix might be to remove the
> restriction on the order in which the options can be specified.
+100 :-)
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
--
Sent via pgsql-ha
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> I found an error message in pgbench is quite confusing.
> Not really objecting, but an even better fix might be to remove the
> restriction on the order in which the options can be specified.
Indeed. It doesn't look
Hello Tatsuo-san,
I found an error message in pgbench is quite confusing.
pgbench -S -M extended -c 1 -T 30 test
query mode (-M) should be specified before any transaction scripts (-f or -b)
Since there's no -f or -b option is specified, users will be
confused.
Indeed.
Actually the error o
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> I found an error message in pgbench is quite confusing.
>
> pgbench -S -M extended -c 1 -T 30 test
> query mode (-M) should be specified before any transaction scripts (-f or -b)
>
> Since there's no -f or -b option is specified, users will be
