Horton

Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench

Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>, Raúl Marín Rodríguez <rmrodriguez@carto.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-12-05T03:53:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> ISTM one key issue here is whether pgbench's expression language is
> meant to model SQL (where we have function overloading) or C (where
> there is no overloading).  I don't think we've really settled on a
> fixed policy on that, but maybe now is the time.

abs() is doing that already. Having some rules in the shape of at
least a comment would be nice.

> If we do think that function overloading is OK, there remains the
> question of when the typing is resolved.  I think Robert is objecting
> to resolving at runtime, and I tend to agree that that's something
> we'd regret in the long run.  It doesn't match either SQL or C.

+1.
-- 
Michael

Commits

  1. Add pow(), aka power(), function to pgbench.

  2. pgbench: Support double constants and functions.