(I just pushed the patch, didn't see your post until after that)
On 09/21/2016 01:07 PM, Kuntal Ghosh wrote:
On Thus, July 7,2016 at 08:39 PM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
Also there is still the bug under -t which displays a 0 latency.
Your patch clearly fixed the issue.
The attached patch still fixes that and make it consistent the other way
around, i.e. by using "=" for latency. I switched to use ":" for weight
which is an input parameter. I let ":" when there is a long sentence to
describe the figure displayed, more on aesthetic grounds.
In the above context, I suggest few other changes.
Present output-> progress: 1.0 s, 1221.0 tps, lat 0.816 ms stddev 0.272
Suggestion-> progress: 1.0 s, 1221.0 tps, lat avg 0.816 ms stddev 0.272 ms
Yeah, perhaps.
Present output->
SQL script 1: so.sql
- weight = 1 (targets 50.0% of total)
- 10010 transactions (50.1% of total, tps = 100.101872)
- latency average = 1.878 ms
- latency stddev = 3.614 ms
Suggestion->
SQL script 1: so.sql
- weight = 1 (targets 50.0% of total)
- 10010 transactions (50.1% of total)
- tps = 100.101872
- latency average = 1.878 ms
- latency stddev = 3.614 ms
I think it fits well on a single line.
Apart from that, pgbench.sgml should be updated to reflect latency
average in the output.
pgbench.sgml actually already had the "latency average = ..." version in
its example. Even before this patch, we printed it with a "=" if one of
options that caused per-transaction timings to be measured, like --rate,
was used, and as ":" otherwise.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
