* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> It's says:
> >>
> >> starting vacuum ERROR: blah
> >> ERROR: blah
> >> ERROR: blah
> >> done
> >>
> >> And then continues on. Sure, that'
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >> It's says:
> >>
> >> starting vacuum ERROR: blah
> >> ERROR: blah
> >> ERROR: blah
> >> done
> >>
> >> And then continues on. Sure, that'
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
>> It's says:
>>
>> starting vacuum ERROR: blah
>> ERROR: blah
>> ERROR: blah
>> done
>>
>> And then continues on. Sure, that's not the greatest error reporting
>> output ever, but what do yo
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> It's says:
>
> starting vacuum ERROR: blah
> ERROR: blah
> ERROR: blah
> done
>
> And then continues on. Sure, that's not the greatest error reporting
> output ever, but what do you expect from pgbench? I think it's clear
> enough what's going
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>> But as far as what has been discussed on the central topic of this thread, I
>>> think that doing the vacuum and making the failure for non-existent tables
>>> be non-
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>> But as far as what has been discussed on the central topic of this thread, I
>> think that doing the vacuum and making the failure for non-existent tables
>> be non-fatal when -f is provided would be an improvement. Or m
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> But as far as what has been discussed on the central topic of this thread, I
> think that doing the vacuum and making the failure for non-existent tables
> be non-fatal when -f is provided would be an improvement. Or maybe just
> making it non-
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I would rather just learn to add the -n when I use -f
> and don't have the default tables in place, than have to learn new methods
> for saying "no really, I left -n off on purpose" when I have a custom file
> which does use the default tables
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> > wrote:
> > > Here's a completely different idea. How about we add an option that
> > > means "vacuum this table before running the test" (can be given several
> >
On 2/10/15 3:12 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> - The documentation misses some markups for pgbench and VACUUM and did
>>> not respect the 80-character limit.
>>
>> I didn't realize that there's such a style guide. Although I think
>> it's a goo
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> - The documentation misses some markups for pgbench and VACUUM and did
>>> not respect the 80-character limit.
>>
>> I didn't realize that there's such a style guide. Although I think
>> it's a good thing, I just want to know where such a g
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> - The documentation misses some markups for pgbench and VACUUM and did
>> not respect the 80-character limit.
>
> I didn't realize that there's such a style guide. Although I think
> it's a good thing, I just want to know where such a guide is
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> Agreed. Here is the patch to implement the idea: -f just implies -n.
>
> Some small comments:
> - is_no_vacuum, as well as is_init_mode, are defined as an integers
> but their use imply that they are boolean switches. This patch sets
> is_no
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Agreed. Here is the patch to implement the idea: -f just implies -n.
Some small comments:
- is_no_vacuum, as well as is_init_mode, are defined as an integers
but their use imply that they are boolean switches. This patch sets
is_no_vacuum to tr
>>> Although that might be taking this thread rather far off-topic.
>> Not really sure about that, because the only outstanding objection to
>> this discussion is what happens in the startup stage if you specify -f.
>> Right now vacuum is attempted on the standard tables, which is probably
>> not t
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>> Although that might be taking this thread rather far off-topic.
> Not really sure about that, because the only outstanding objection to
> this discussion is what happens in the startup stage if you specify -f.
> Right now vacuum is attempt
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > Here's a completely different idea. How about we add an option that
> > means "vacuum this table before running the test" (can be given several
> > times); by default the set of vacuumed tables is the current pgbenc
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> Here's a completely different idea. How about we add an option that
> means "vacuum this table before running the test" (can be given several
> times); by default the set of vacuumed tables is the current pgbench_*
> list, but if -f is spec
Here's a completely different idea. How about we add an option that
means "vacuum this table before running the test" (can be given several
times); by default the set of vacuumed tables is the current pgbench_*
list, but if -f is specified then the default set is cleared. So if you
have a -f scri
> First of all - I'm not entirely convinced the "IF EXISTS" approach is
> somehow better than "-f implies -n" suggested before, but I don't have a
> strong preference either.
I revisited the "-f implies -n" approach again. The main reason why I
wanted to avoid the approach was, it breaks the backw
On 22.12.2014 18:41, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-12-22 18:17:56 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 22.12.2014 17:47, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Tomas Vondra wrote:
On 22.12.2014 07:36, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> On 22.12.2014 00:28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>>
>> (8) Also, I think it's not nece
On 2014-12-22 18:17:56 +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 22.12.2014 17:47, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> On 22.12.2014 07:36, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >>> On 22.12.2014 00:28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >
> (8) Also, I think it's not necessary to define function prototypes for
> >>
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> I'm not objecting to prototypes in general, but I believe the principle
> is to respect how the existing code is written. There are almost no
> other prototypes in pgbench.c - e.g. there are no prototypes for
> executeStatement(), init() etc. so adding the prototypes in this
On 22.12.2014 17:47, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 22.12.2014 07:36, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> On 22.12.2014 00:28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
(8) Also, I think it's not necessary to define function prototypes for
executeStatement2 and is_table_exists. It certainly is no
Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 22.12.2014 07:36, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > On 22.12.2014 00:28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> (8) Also, I think it's not necessary to define function prototypes for
> >> executeStatement2 and is_table_exists. It certainly is not
> >> consistent with the other functions d
On 22.12.2014 07:36, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> On 22.12.2014 00:28, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>>
>> (2) The 'executeStatement2' API is a bit awkward as the signarure
>>
>> executeStatement2(PGconn *con, const char *sql, const char *table);
>>
>> suggests that the 'sql' command is executed when 'table
> Hi,
>
> On 21.12.2014 15:58, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway
> then we need to do something about the error message; either
> squelch it or check for the existence of the t
Hi,
On 21.12.2014 15:58, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway
then we need to do something about the error message; either
squelch it or check for the existence of the tables befo
> - Error to apply to the current master:
Works for me.
$ git apply ~/pgbench-f-noexit-v2.patch
$
Maybe git version difference or the patch file was malformed by mail
client?
> +static void executeStatement2(PGconn *con, const char *sql, const char
> *table);
>
> I think we can use a better
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Tatsuo Ishii
wrote:
> >>> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we
> >>> need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or
> >>> check for the existence of
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we
>>> need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or
>>> check for the existence of the tables before attempting to
>>> vacuum. Since there's no way
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we
>> need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or
>> check for the existence of the tables before attempting to
>> vacuum. Since there's no way to squ
On 2014-12-15 10:55:30 -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> > > Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
> > > pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
> > > is not specified.
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> > Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
> > pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
> > is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
> > prevent
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
>> pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
>> is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
>> prevent this
On 14 December 2014 at 13:50, Jim Nasby wrote:
>
> On 12/13/14, 6:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
>> Problem with "-f implies -n" approach is, it breaks backward
>> compatibility. There are use cases using custom script*and* pgbench_*
>> tables. For example the particular user wants to use the stand
> If we care enough about that case to attempt the vacuum anyway then we
> need to do something about the error message; either squelch it or
> check for the existence of the tables before attempting to
> vacuum. Since there's no way to squelch in the server logfile, I think
> checking for the tabl
On 12/13/14, 6:17 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
Problem with "-f implies -n" approach is, it breaks backward
compatibility. There are use cases using custom script*and* pgbench_*
tables. For example the particular user wants to use the standard
pgbench tables and is not satisfied with the built in sce
> On 14 December 2014 at 04:39, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> > Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
>> > pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
>> > is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
>> > pr
On 14 December 2014 at 04:39, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> > Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
> > pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
> > is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
> > prevent th
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
> pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
> is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
> prevent this, -n must be specified. For me this behavior seems insane
Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
prevent this, -n must be specified. For me this behavior seems insane
because "-f" does not necessa
42 matches
Mail list logo
