Re: pgbench more operators & functions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: pgbench more operators & functions
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa0zp4A+S+KosaV4QfDz-wA56vLpH8me86rmpsnkvWc2w@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pgbench more operators & functions  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: pgbench more operators & functions  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>> Attached version changes:
>>  - removes C operators not present in psql
>>  - document operators one per line
>
> Moved to next CF with same status: "Ready for committer".

I think it's pretty clear that this patch is not Ready for Committer,
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, but in addition to that, I don't think much of an argument has
been made that any of this is actually useful.  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'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.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Heikki Linnakangas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Logical tape pause/resume
Следующее
От: Fabien COELHO
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgbench more operators & functions