Re: pgbench throttling latency limit
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgbench throttling latency limit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 54134D75.4010403@vmware.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgbench throttling latency limit (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgbench throttling latency limit
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/12/2014 08:59 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > >> The output would look something like this (modified from the manual's example >> by hand, so the numbers don't add up): >> >> 0 199 2241 0 1175850568 995598 1020 >> 0 200 2465 0 1175850568 998079 1010 >> 0 201 skipped 1175850569 608 3011 >> 0 202 skipped 1175850569 608 2400 >> 0 203 skipped 1175850569 608 1000 >> 0 204 2513 0 1175850569 608 500 >> 0 205 2038 0 1175850569 2663 500 > > My 0.02€: ISTM that the number of columns should stay the same whether it > is skipped or not, so the "file_no" should be kept. Oh, sorry, I totally agree. I left file_no out by mistake. > Maybe to keep it a > number would make sense (-1) or just a sign (-) which means "no value" > with gnuplot for instance. Or "skipped". > > Basically I would be fine with that, but as I do not use the log file > feature I'm not sure that my opinion should count. > > Note that there are also potential issues with the aggregate logging and > the sampling stuff. Yep. - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: