Re: pgbench - minor fix for meta command only scripts

Hello Tom,

>> Ok. Here is an updated version, with a better suffix and a simplified
>> comment.
>
> Doesn't this break the handling of latency calculations, or at least make
> the results completely different for the last metacommand than what they
> would be for a non-last command?  It looks like it needs to loop back so
> that the latency calculation is completed for the metacommand before it
> can exit.  Seems to me it would probably make more sense to fall out at
> the end of the "transaction finished" if-block, around line 1923 in HEAD.

Indeed, it would trouble a little bit the stats computation by delaying 
the recording of the end of statement & transaction.

However line 1923 is a shortcut for ending pgbench, but at the end of a 
transaction more stuff must be done, eg choosing the next script and 
reconnecting, before exiting. The solution is more contrived.

The attached patch provides a solution which ensures the return in the 
right condition and after the stat collection. The code structure requires 
another ugly boolean to proceed so as to preserve doing the reconnection 
between the decision that the return must be done and the place where it 
can be done, after reconnecting.

> (The code structure in here seems like a complete mess to me, but probably
> now is not the time to refactor it.)

I fully agree that the code structure is a total mess:-( Maybe I'll try to 
submit a simpler one some day.

Basically the doCustom function is not resilient, you cannot exit from 
anywhere and hope that re-entring would achieve a consistent behavior.

While reading the code to find a better place for a return, I noted some 
possible inconsistencies in recording stats, which are noted as comments 
in the attached patch.

Calling chooseScript is done both from outside for initialization and from 
inside doCustom, where it could be done once and more clearly in doCustom.

Boolean listen is not reset because the script is expected to execute 
directly the start of the next statement. I succeeded in convincing myself 
that it actually works, but it is unobvious to spot why. I think that a 
simpler pattern would be welcome. Also, some other things (eg prepared) 
are not reset in all cases, not sure why.

The goto should probably be replaced by a while.

...

-- 
Fabien.