| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rukh Meski <rukh(dot)meski(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgbench throttling latency limit |
| Date: | 2014-08-29 17:48:43 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.10.1408291942590.3477@sto |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Heikki,
> [...] I would be fine with both.
After giving it some thought, ISTM better to choose consistency over
intuition, and have latency under throttling always defined wrt the
scheduled start time and not the actual start time, even if having a
latency of 10000 ms for an OLTP load might seem surprising to some.
The other one can be computed by substracting the average lag time.
I attached a v6 which is a consolidate patch of v5 + the small update for
the latency definition.
--
Fabien.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pgbench-limit-6.patch | text/x-diff | 14.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-08-29 17:50:45 | clang warning on master |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-08-29 17:47:58 | Re: On partitioning |