I've got no objection to a more-nearly-TPC-B script as an option.
Good, because adding a "per-spec" tpc-b as an additional builtin option is one of my intentions, once pgbench is capable of it.
Trying to scan the thread as an interested third-party - without hacker skills...
Maybe consider writing a full patch series that culminates with this additional builtin option being added as the final patch - breaking out this (and probably other) "requirements" patches separately to aid in review. The presentation of just "add new stuff that seems useful" opens too much room for isolated discussion without knowing what the big picture requires. At worse you'll at least have a working version of a forked pgbench that can do what you want.
As it stands right now you haven't provided enough context for this patch and only the social difficulty of actually marking a patch rejected has prevented its demise in its current form - because while it has interesting ideas its added maintenance burden for -core without any in-core usage. But it you make it the first patch in a 3-patch series that implements the per-spec tpc-b the discussion moves away from these support functions and into the broader framework in which they are made useful.
