| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: add modulo (%) operator to pgbench |
| Date: | 2014-09-23 19:36:48 |
| Message-ID: | 5421CBD0.1070103@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/23/2014 09:15 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> So I'm inclined to reject rather than put in something that may cause
>> surprises down the road. The usefulness doesn't seem great enough to
>> take that risk.
Marked as "Returned with feedback".
> If you reject it, you can also remove the gaussian and exponential random
> distribution which is near useless without a mean to add a minimal
> pseudo-random stage, for which "(x * something) % size" is a reasonable
> approximation, hence the modulo submission.
I'm confused. The gaussian and exponential patch was already committed.
Are you saying that it's not actually useful, and should be reverted?
That doesn't make sense to me, gaussian and exponential distributed
values seems quite useful to me in test scripts.
I don't understand what that pseudo-random stage you're talking about
is. Can you elaborate?
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-09-23 19:38:05 | Re: delta relations in AFTER triggers |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2014-09-23 19:05:16 | Re: proposal: rounding up time value less than its unit. |