> It's certainly a bug that the combination of the switches doesn't work,
> and I already fixed it (47211af17a). My question was more towards
> whether -C is a useful benchmarking option at all. I cannot imagine
> a situation in which, if someone said "I'm doing only one transaction per
> session
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's certainly a bug that the combination of the switches doesn't work,
> and I already fixed it (47211af17a). My question was more towards
> whether -C is a useful benchmarking option at all. I cannot imagine
> a situation in which, if someone
> We're not resetting the prepared[] array when we pull the plug on an
> existing connection.
>
> Is a connection per transaction really a sane case to consider?
Yes, I would think. This case reveals the connection overhead. We
already are able to handle the simple query cases. Why not for
extend
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's certainly a bug that the combination of the switches doesn't work,
>> and I already fixed it (47211af17a). My question was more towards
>> whether -C is a useful benchmarking option
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
> Sounds like a bug. We should either fix pgbench so that -M and -C can
> be used together (I don't see any technical reason why we can't do
> this) or modify pgbench to not allow using -M and -C (less desirable).
We're not resetting the prepared[] array when we pull the plug
Hello Tatsuo,
We're not resetting the prepared[] array when we pull the plug on an
existing connection.
Is a connection per transaction really a sane case to consider?
Yes, I would think. This case reveals the connection overhead. We
already are able to handle the simple query cases. Why not
Fabien COELHO writes:
>>> Is a connection per transaction really a sane case to consider?
>> Yes, I would think. This case reveals the connection overhead. We
>> already are able to handle the simple query cases. Why not for
>> extended query cases?
> Probably it can be made to work, but it is m
Sounds like a bug. We should either fix pgbench so that -M and -C can
be used together (I don't see any technical reason why we can't do
this) or modify pgbench to not allow using -M and -C (less desirable).
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_e
