On 10/02/2019 22:55, Tom Lane wrote: > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: >>> On 10 Feb 2019, at 04:50, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Does anyone else feel that this is interesting/useful data? > >> Absolutely, +1 on this. In Greenplum we print the runtime of the script and >> the runtime of the diff, both of which have provided useful feedback on where >> to best spend optimization efforts (the diff time of course being a lot less >> interesting in upstream postgres due to gpdb having it’s own diff tool to >> handle segment variability). > > Seems like I'm far from the first to think of this --- I wonder why > nobody submitted a patch before?
Now that I see this in action, it makes the actual test results harder to identify flying by. I understand the desire to collect this timing data, but that is a special use case and not relevant to the normal use of the test suite, which is to see whether the test passes. Can we make this optional please? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
