Hello,
>> I can remove the line, but I strongly believe that reporting performance
>> figures if some client connection failed thus the bench could not run as
>> prescribed is a bad behavior. The good news is that it is probably quite
>> unlikely. So I'd prefer to keep it and possibly submit a patch to change
>> the behavior.
>
> I agree such a situation is very bad, and I understood you have a plan to
> submit patches for fix it. If so leaving lines as a TODO is OK.
Thanks.
>> Should be this one: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/30/2624/
>
> This discussion is still on-going, but I can see that the starting time
> may be delayed for looking up all pgbench-variables.
Yep, that's it.
> (I think the status of this thread might be wrong. it should be
> 'Needs review,' but now 'Waiting on Author.')
I changed it to "Needs review".
> This patch is mostly good and can change a review status soon,
> however, I think it should wait that related patch.
Hmmm.
> Please discuss how to fix it with Tom,
I would not have the presumption to pressure Tom's agenda in any way!
> and this will commit soon.
and this will wait till its time comes. In the mean time, I think that you
should put the patch status as you see fit, independently of the other
patch: it seems unlikely that they would be committed together, and I'll
have to merge the remaining one anyway.
--
Fabien.
