"Dickson S. Guedes" <listas@guedesoft.net> writes:
> So, in a way to avoid the scenario where a ROLE has an explicit
> search_path set to schemes that already have tables named same as the
> pgbench's tables, doesn't makes sense also create a "pgbench_" suffix
> for them?
Hm, just rename the standard scenario's tables to pgbench_accounts
etc? Sure, but then we break custom pgbench scripts that happen
to be using the default tables for their own purposes. There's
no free lunch.
regards, tom lane