| From: | Gregory Smith <gregsmithpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: add modulo (%) operator to pgbench |
| Date: | 2014-09-25 13:18:19 |
| Message-ID: | 5424161B.4070702@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/25/14, 8:38 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> That's my whole reason for not wanting to adopt Fabien's approach in
> the first place: I was cool with exposing C's modulo operator, but any
> other modulo semantics seem like they should be built up from
> general-purpose primitives.
Maybe; I don't quite understand his requirements well enough yet to know
if that's possible, or if it's easier to give him a full special
operator of his own. But since what you did makes that easier, too,
forward progress regardless.
> Anyway, I think the first thing is that somebody needs to spend some
> time testing, polishing, and documenting this patch, before we start
> adding to it. I'm hoping someone else will volunteer - other tasks
> beckon.
I bouncing it to here for you, and I expect to help with those parts
presumably in addition to Fabien's help:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1581
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-09-25 13:25:16 | Re: Spinlocks and compiler/memory barriers |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-09-25 12:50:28 | Re: Sloppy thinking about leakproof properties of opclass co-members |