> BTW, I saw this with 9.3.2's pgbench: > > 239300000 of 3800000000 tuples (-48%) done (elapsed 226.86 s, remaining > -696.10 s). > > -48% does not seem to be quite correct to me...
Included is a proposed fix for this (also fixing weired "remaining" part). If there's no objection, I will commit it. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
diff --git a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c index 2c96fae..28ab52f 100644 --- a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c +++ b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c @@ -1720,11 +1720,11 @@ init(bool is_no_vacuum) INSTR_TIME_SUBTRACT(diff, start); elapsed_sec = INSTR_TIME_GET_DOUBLE(diff); - remaining_sec = (scale * naccounts - j) * elapsed_sec / j; + remaining_sec = ((int64)scale * naccounts - j) * elapsed_sec / j; fprintf(stderr, INT64_FORMAT " of " INT64_FORMAT " tuples (%d%%) done (elapsed %.2f s, remaining %.2f s).\n", j, (int64) naccounts * scale, - (int) (((int64) j * 100) / (naccounts * scale)), + (int) (((int64) j * 100) / (naccounts * (int64)scale)), elapsed_sec, remaining_sec); } /* let's not call the timing for each row, but only each 100 rows */
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
