Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> I think you could get the same effect by putting the -W in PGOPTIONS (in
>>> pgbench's environment).
>
>> That's a good point. It does have the downside that it will affect the
>> pgbench results - though that wou
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That clarifies the situation well enough for me. I think this is a two
> part problem then. It's not necessarily obvious that pgbench will use
> PGOPTIONS. In addition to that, the current documentation is less clear
> than it could be on the subject o
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Neil Conway wrote:
Perhaps one of the slightly unfortunate consequences of the postmaster
=> postgres merge is that there is less of a clear distinction between
"postmaster options" and "postgres" options...
I'd already read all of the documentation that you and Tom sugges
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I once wrote a similar patch to the one Dave submitted here and feel like
> it's worth committing at least a documentation patch to show how to deal
> with this. It's not obvious that pgbench pays attention to the
> environment variables at all, and it's
On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:12 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
> I just poked around the
> documentation a bit and I didn't find anything that cleared up which
> options you can pass from a client
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/static/libpq-envars.html
Which says only "PGOPTIONS sets additional run-t
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
I concur with Alvaro that this case seems adequately covered by
PGOPTIONS="-W n" pgbench ...
I started to disagree with this, but ultimately realized anyone who is
running pgbench for long enough to get useful results shouldn't have their
TPS impa
Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I think you could get the same effect by putting the -W in PGOPTIONS (in
>> pgbench's environment).
> That's a good point. It does have the downside that it will affect the
> pgbench results - though that wouldn't actually be an issu
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>> I'm aware of postgres -W, but wanted something that wouldn't get in the
>> way of other connections and would only affect my pgbench tests.
>
> I think you could get the same effect by putting the -W in PGOPTIONS (in
> pgbench's environment).
>
That
Dave Page wrote:
> I'm aware of postgres -W, but wanted something that wouldn't get in the
> way of other connections and would only affect my pgbench tests.
I think you could get the same effect by putting the -W in PGOPTIONS (in
pgbench's environment).
--
Alvaro Herrera http:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:58:21 +
Dave Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:27 +, Dave Page wrote:
> >> Whilst doing some profiling of the server I found it useful to add
> >> an option to pgbench to i
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:27 +, Dave Page wrote:
>> Whilst doing some profiling of the server I found it useful to add an
>> option to pgbench to introduce a delay between client connection setup
>> and the start of the benchmark itself to allow me time to attach the
>> prof
On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:27 +, Dave Page wrote:
> Whilst doing some profiling of the server I found it useful to add an
> option to pgbench to introduce a delay between client connection setup
> and the start of the benchmark itself to allow me time to attach the
> profiler to one of the backen
Dave Page wrote:
> Whilst doing some profiling of the server I found it useful to add an
> option to pgbench to introduce a delay between client connection setup
> and the start of the benchmark itself to allow me time to attach the
> profiler to one of the backends.
Hmm, the backend already has a
13 matches
Mail list logo
