On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:22, Greg Smith wrote:
> It's hard to justify making a change that will produce less accurate results
> in the vast majority of cases, just to improve behavior in a situation where
> useless results are coming out no matter what.
When I added -T option, I only expected s
On 08/26/2011 11:13 PM, mark wrote:
Using the -T flag in pgbench I noticed that -T is a just a effort rather
than a hard cut off.
...
Expected behavior would be -T would mean a hard cut off.
If there's a hard cut-off, that means that partially completed
transactions are not included in the
"mark" writes:
> Expected behavior would be -T would mean a hard cut off.
Why would you expect that?
What I'd expect is that each transaction would be run to completion,
which would mean that -T cannot possibly be exact. Even if it were,
what's your notion of "exact"? Clock resolutions are di
Using the -T flag in pgbench I noticed that -T is a just a effort rather
than a hard cut off.
With a (misbehaving) pooler and a "large" number of clients+jobs it's
possible to have the pgbench run extend by several seconds or even minutes
past the allotted time by -T. (or hang indefinitely if the
