Re: pgbench more operators & functions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: pgbench more operators & functions
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa0zp4A+S+KosaV4QfDz-wA56vLpH8me86rmpsnkvWc2w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgbench more operators & functions  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pgbench more operators & functions  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
List 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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical tape pause/resume
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench more operators & functions