On 10/02/2019 22:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
>>> On 10 Feb 2019, at 04:50, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Does anyone else feel that this is interesting/useful data?
>
>> Absolutely, +1 on this. In Greenplum we print the runtime of the script and
>> the runtime of the diff, both of which have provided useful feedback on where
>> to best spend optimization efforts (the diff time of course being a lot less
>> interesting in upstream postgres due to gpdb having it’s own diff tool to
>> handle segment variability).
>
> Seems like I'm far from the first to think of this --- I wonder why
> nobody submitted a patch before?
Now that I see this in action, it makes the actual test results harder
to identify flying by. I understand the desire to collect this timing
data, but that is a special use case and not relevant to the normal use
of the test suite, which is to see whether the test passes. Can we make
this optional please?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
