Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench
От | Rintaro Ikeda |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7552d982-51cf-4a41-80c5-ce3dee4f6765@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench (Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Suggestion to add --continue-client-on-abort option to pgbench
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2025/07/16 22:49, Yugo Nagata wrote: >> I think we should also change the error message in pg_log_error. I modified the >> patch v8-0003 as follows: >> @@ -3383,8 +3383,8 @@ readCommandResponse(CState *st, MetaCommand meta, char >> *varprefix) >> >> default: >> /* anything else is unexpected */ >> - pg_log_error("client %d script %d aborted in >> command %d query %d: %s", >> - st->id, st->use_file, >> st->command, qrynum, >> + pg_log_error("client %d aborted in command %d >> query %d of script %d: %s", >> + st->id, st->command, >> qrynum, st->use_file, >> PQerrorMessage(st->con)); >> goto error; >> } >> >> With this change, the output now is like this: >>> pgbench: error: client 0 aborted in command 1 query 0 of script 0: ERROR: >> duplicate key value violates unique constraint "test_col2_key" >> >> I want hear your thoughts. > > My idea is to modify this as follows; > > default: > /* anything else is unexpected */ > - pg_log_error("client %d script %d aborted in command %d query %d: %s", > - st->id, st->use_file, st->command, qrynum, > - PQerrorMessage(st->con)); > + commandFailed(st, "SQL", PQerrorMessage(st->con)); > goto error; > } > > This fix is originally planned to be included in patch v8, but was missed. > It is now included in the attached patch, v10. > > With this change, the output becomes: > > pgbench: error: client 0 aborted in command 0 (SQL) of script 0; > ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "t2_pkey" > > Although there is a slight difference, the message is essentially the same as > your proposal. Also, I believe the use of commandFailed() makes the code simpler > and more consistent. > > What do you think? > Thank you for the new patch! I think Nagata-san's v10 patch is a clear improvement over my v9 patch. I'm happy with the changes. >> Also, let me ask one question. In this case, I directly modified your commit in >> the v8-0003 patch. Is that the right way to update the patch? > > I’m not sure if that’s the best way, but I think modifying the patch directly is a > valid way to propose an alternative approach during discussion, as long as the original > patch is respected. It can often help clarify suggestions. I understand that. Thank you. Regards, Rintaro Ikeda
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: