Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From ITAGAKI Takahiro
Subject Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench
Date
Msg-id 20071018120752.8A98.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes:
> > All of filler fields in branches, tellers and history is NULL. It is
> > probabbly a mistake because there are fields of char(22-88) in the table
> > definitions.
> > TPC-B requires at least 100 bytes per row for all tables used in it.
>
> I'm not in favor of changing this.  pgbench has never pretended to be
> "really" TPC-B, nor has anyone ever tried to compare its numbers against
> other TPC-B numbers.  On the other hand, people *do* compare pgbench
> numbers to itself over time, and if we make a change like this it will
> break comparability of the results.

Ok, I feel it reasonable.
The attached is a patch to mention it in the source code.

Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center


Attachment

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Douglas Toltzman
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #3680: memory leak when excuting a SQL "selectcount(id) from chinatelecom;"
Next
From: Julius Stroffek
Date:
Subject: Re: 'on insert do instead' rule with a where clause responds 'INSERT 0 0'