RE: seems like a bug in pgbench -R
От | Imai, Yoshikazu |
---|---|
Тема | RE: seems like a bug in pgbench -R |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0F97FA9ABBDBE54F91744A9B37151A513274C1@g01jpexmbkw24 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: seems like a bug in pgbench -R (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
RE: seems like a bug in pgbench -R
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, July 24, 2019 at 7:02 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > but I have one question. Is it better adding any check like if(maxsock > > != -1) before the select? > > > > else /* no explicit delay, select without timeout */ > > { > > nsocks = select(maxsock + 1, &input_mask, NULL, NULL, NULL); } > > I think that it is not necessary because this case cannot happen: If some > clients are still running (remains > 0), they are either sleeping, in > which case there would be a timeout, or they are waiting for something > from the server, otherwise the script could be advanced further so there > would be something else to do for the thread. Ah, I understand. > We could check this by adding "Assert(maxsock != -1);" before this select, > but I would not do that for a released version. Yeah I also imagined that we can use Assert, but ah, it's released version. I got it. Thanks for telling that. So I'll mark this ready for committer. -- Yoshikazu Imai
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: