Re: pgbench - adding pl/pgsql versions of tests
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgbench - adding pl/pgsql versions of tests |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52432287-b496-abd3-edc-4beddbc051f0@mines-paristech.fr обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgbench - adding pl/pgsql versions of tests (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgbench - adding pl/pgsql versions of tests
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Nathan, >> I'm unclear about what variety of scripts that could be provided given the >> tables made available with pgbench. ISTM that other scenari would involve >> both an initialization and associated scripts, and any proposal would be >> bared because it would open the door to anything. > > Why's that? Just a wild guess based on 19 years of occasional contributions to pg and pgbench in particular:-) > I'm not aware of any project policy that prohibits such enhancements to > pgbench. Attempts in extending pgbench often fall under "you can do it outside (eg with a custom script) so there is no need to put that in pgbench as it would add to the maintenance burden with a weak benefit proven by the fact that it is not there already". > It might take some effort to gather consensus on a proposal like this, > but IMHO that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Done it in the past. Probably will do it again in the future:-) > If the prevailing wisdom is that we shouldn't add more built-in scripts > because there is an existing way to provide custom ones, then it's not > clear that we should proceed with $SUBJECT, anyway. I'm afraid there is that argument. I do not think that this policy is good wrt $SUBJECT, ISTM that having an easy way to test something with a PL/pgSQL function would help promote the language by advertising/showing the potential performance benefit (or not, depending). Just one function would be enough for that. -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: