Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgbench enhancements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgbench enhancements
Date: 2006-07-26 14:58:02
Message-ID: 1879.1153925882@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> BTW, running long benchmark using pgbench on BIG tables easily causes
> an integer overflow error in following SQLs:

Right.

> I'm inclined to change abalance, tbalance and bbalance column to
> BIGINT to avoid the error. Opinion?

No.  The problem is that the deltas are invariably positive, which is
not realistic (at least *my* bank balance isn't uniformly increasing :-().
I think the correct fix is just to tweak the range of the randomly
distributed deltas to be plus and minus not always plus.

If you change to bigint then post-change results won't be strictly
comparable to pre-change results because of the difference in execution
costs.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-07-26 15:01:41
Subject: Re: Better name/syntax for "online" index creation
Previous:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2006-07-26 14:55:51
Subject: Re: patch implementing the multi-argument aggregates (SOC project)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group