On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 7:24 PM Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
> > Seems like it should be straightforward to fix, though, with fixes
> > already proposed (though I haven't studied them yet, will do).
>
> I think that fixing logging is simple enough, thus a revert is not
> necessary.
I prepared a draft revert patch for discussion, just in case it comes
in handy. This reverts "pgbench: Improve time logic.", but "pgbench:
Synchronize client threads." remains (slightly rearranged).
I'm on the fence TBH, I can see that it's really small things and it
seems we have the patches, but it's late, late enough that
benchmarking gurus are showing up to benchmark with it for real, and
it's not great to be getting in the way of that with what is mostly
refactoring work, so I don't think it would be a bad thing if we
agreed to try again in 15. (A number of arguments for and against
moving pgbench out of the postgresql source tree and release cycle
occur to me, but I guess that's a topic for another thread.)
> > [...] For that reason, I'm not super attached to that new pg_time_usec_t
> > stuff at all, and wouldn't be sad if we reverted that piece.
>
> Well, I was sooo happy to get rid of INSTR_TIME ugly and inefficient
> macros in pgbench… so anything looks better to me.
I don't love it either, in this code or the executor. (I know you
also don't like the THREAD_CREATE etc macros. I have something to
propose to improve that for 15....)
> Note that Michaël is having a look at fixing pgbench logging issues.
Yeah I've been catching up with these threads.
