| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Foreign keys in pgbench |
| Date: | 2012-05-13 19:03:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_UuXV_Y+p1qaux8E8_DWgSJrGmDmadG6zs=_cwm7DebHQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13 May 2012 18:07, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think that pgbench should it make it easy to assess the impact of
> foreign key constraints.
I agree in principle. I favour being more inclusive about pgbench
options, even if the need for such options is only marginal, which
this isn't - I personally would have found it very useful recently.
pgbench is an expert-level tool, and I find arguments against adding
more options along the lines of "that will distract beginner users"
completely unconvincing.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-05-13 19:04:51 | Strange issues with 9.2 pg_basebackup & replication |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-13 18:11:52 | Re: WaitLatchOrSocket API needs more thought for socket error conditions |