Hello Robert,
I think it's pretty clear that this patch is not Ready for Committer,
As a reviewer, I do not know when to decide to put something as "ready".
My opinion is that it is a matter of the reviewer to decide. Whether some
consensus is actually reached, or whether a committer is going to disagree
later on, cannot be helped.
because there's no consensus that we want this, and like Tom and
Stephen, I'd argue that there are large parts of it we don't want.
The documentation in the latest patch version mentions XOR and IF
which we definitely don't want because there is no similar thing in
SQL,
I have removed these and put CASE WHEN THEN ELSE END instead in v6.
but in addition to that, I don't think much of an argument has
been made that any of this is actually useful.
In the TPC-B benchmark, some conditional is needed because under some
probability an account must be chosen in the *same* branch as the teller,
otherwise in the *other* branches.
I'm skeptical about the notion that giving pgbench a vast repertoire of
mathematical functions is a good idea. What does that actually let us
do that is useful and not possible today?
I do not see a vast "repertoire" of functions. There are "usual" int
operators, logical operators, and a few functions.
About the one added in this patch:
bitwise operations: I have seen some use to create a non uniform random
from a random one. Once one operator is put in, there is no reason not to
put the others...
exp & ln: could be used to tweak distributions.
conditional: see above.
I have not put trigonometric functions because I could not think of a
use in a benchmarking context.
I'm happy to see pgbench made better in a variety of ways, but I don't
really see why that particular thing is useful. Perhaps I'm just
missing something.
I'm trying to add features that are IMO useful for benchmarking.
When doing so, someone says "hay, you put a double expression, you must
put double variables". Although I can see the point of double expressions
for passing ints into some transformations, I can't see a double variable
really useful in any benchmark, but there it is, it is a side effect of
the process, and it is somehow to have orthogonal features.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
