Re: pgbench -f and vacuum

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: pgbench -f and vacuum
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1zwx7i+rQR-m_ndpep1FNLp0kaHF2ZMDQk1YBFb9p+2EQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pgbench -f and vacuum  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: pgbench -f and vacuum  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org> writes:
> Currently pgbench -f (run custom script) executes vacuum against
> pgbench_* tables before stating bench marking if -n (or --no-vacuum)
> is not specified. If those tables do not exist, pgbench fails. To
> prevent this, -n must be specified. For me this behavior seems insane
> because "-f" does not necessarily suppose the existence of the
> pgbench_* tables.  Attached patch prevents pgbench from exiting even
> if those tables do not exist.

I don't particularly care for this approach.  I think if we want to
do something about this, we should just make -f imply -n.  Although
really, given the lack of complaints so far, it seems like people
manage to deal with this state of affairs just fine.  Do we really
need to do anything?

I hereby complain about this.

It has bugged me several times, and having the errors be non-fatal when -f was given was the best (easy) thing I could come up with as well, but I was too lazy to actually write the code.

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: On partitioning
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Commitfest problems