On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:33 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>
> Hello Masahiko-san,
>
>>>> Currently TRUNCATE pgbench_accounts command is executed within a
>>>> transaction started immediately before it. If we move it out of the
>>>> transaction, the table data will be truncated even if the copying data
>>>> failed. Maybe we can do TRUNCATE pgbench_accounts, pgbench_history
>>>> instead. Thought?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Keep the truncate in the transaction, and truncate both (or all?) tables
>>> together.
>>
>>
>> Attached latest patch incorporated the comments I got so far. Please
>> review it.
>
>
> "g" does not work for me yet when after "f", only the message is slightly
> different, it chokes on another dependency, branches instead of accounts.
>
> sh> ./pgbench -i -I ctpfg
> cleaning up...
> creating tables...
> set primary keys...
> set foreign keys...
> ERROR: cannot truncate a table referenced in a foreign key constraint
> DETAIL: Table "pgbench_history" references "pgbench_branches".
> HINT: Truncate table "pgbench_history" at the same time, or use TRUNCATE
> ... CASCADE.
Sorry, I'd missed something.
> I think that the whole data generation should be in *one* transaction which
> starts with "truncate pgbench_history, pgbench_branches, pgbench_tellers,
> pgbench_accounts;"
Agreed, and fixed.
>
> In passing, I think that the documentation should tell explicitely what the
> default value is (aka "ctgvp").
Agreed.
Attached the latest patch. Please review it.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers