From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgbench stats per script & other stuff
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 18:58:50 -0300
Message-ID: <20160315215850.GA41105@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1603041943110.11128@sto>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >If somebody specifies thousands of -f switches, they will waste a few
> >bytes with each, but I'm hardly concerned about a few dozen kilobytes
> >there ...
>
> Ok, so you prefer a memory leak. I hate it on principle.
I don't "prefer" memory leaks -- I prefer interfaces that make sense.
Speaking of which, I don't think the arrangement in your patch really
does. I know I suggested it, but now that I look again, it turns out I
chose badly and you implemented a bad idea, so can we go back and fix
it, please?
What I now think should really happen is that the current sql_scripts
array, currently under an anonymous struct, should be a typedef, say
ParsedScript, and get a new member for the weight; process_file and
process_builtin return a ParsedScript. The weight and Command ** should
not be part of script_t at all. In fact, with ParsedScript I don't
think we need to give a name to the anon struct used for builtin
scripts. Rename the current sql_scripts.name to "desc", to mirror what
is actually put in there from the builtin array struct. Make addScript
receive a ParsedScript and weight, fill in the weight into the struct,
and put it to the array after sanity-checking. (I'm OK with keeping
"name" instead of renaming to "desc", if that change becomes too
invasive.)
No need for N_BUILTIN; we can use lengthof(builtin_script) instead.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, coelho@cri.ensmp.fr, michael.paquier@gmail.com
Subject: Re: pgbench stats per script & other stuff
In-Reply-To: <20160315215850.GA41105@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox