From: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: pgbench - exclude pthread_create() from connection start timing |
Date: | 2013-10-06 14:10:31 |
Message-ID: | 20131006141031.GA210118@tornado.leadboat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 09:48:04AM +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> Also, I'm not sure of any system used with pgbench that do not have
> threads, so ISTM that the thread fork-emulation hack is more or less
> useless, and it is pretty masochistic to maintain when adding
> features.
Fair point. When added, the code pertaining to fork-emulation was
well-isolated, and that remained the case as recently as 9.3. Your recent
--progress patch was the first to suffer contortions for the benefit of that
mode. (The per-statement latencies feature just declined to support it.)
> >For the time being, I propose the attached comment patch.
>
> It comment seems very clear to me. I do not understand why it starts
> with XXX, though.
PostgreSQL code uses that notation regularly. When I add it, I typically have
in mind "the following is not fully satisfying, but it's not bad enough to
make a point of improving".
I've committed the comment patch.
--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2013-10-06 14:44:14 | Re: pgbench progress report improvements - split 3 v2 - A |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-10-06 07:51:53 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add DISCARD SEQUENCES command. |