Fabien,
>> Included is a proposed fix for this (also fixing weired "remaining"
>> part). If there's no objection, I will commit it.
>
> Looks ok, but I would consider switching to "double" instead of
> "int64".
Assuming you are talking about "remaining sec" part, I agree. Here is
the revised patch.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
diff --git a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
index 2c96fae..00374d8 100644
--- a/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
+++ b/contrib/pgbench/pgbench.c
@@ -1720,11 +1720,11 @@ init(bool is_no_vacuum) INSTR_TIME_SUBTRACT(diff, start); elapsed_sec =
INSTR_TIME_GET_DOUBLE(diff);
- remaining_sec = (scale * naccounts - j) * elapsed_sec / j;
+ remaining_sec = ((double)scale * naccounts - j) * elapsed_sec / j; fprintf(stderr, INT64_FORMAT
"of " INT64_FORMAT " tuples (%d%%) done (elapsed %.2f s, remaining %.2f s).\n", j, (int64) naccounts
*scale,
- (int) (((int64) j * 100) / (naccounts * scale)),
+ (int) (((int64) j * 100) / (naccounts * (int64)scale)), elapsed_sec,
remaining_sec); } /* let's not call the timing for each row, but only each 100 rows */
