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

Re: 64-bit size pgbench

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 64-bit size pgbench
Date: 2010-01-29 16:20:54
Message-ID: 603c8f071001290820h77ff0a65x458fa4d13994deee@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Was looking for general feedback on whether the way I've converted this
>> to use 64 bit integers for the account numbers seems appropriate, and to
>> see if there's any objection to fixing this in general given the
>> potential downsides.
>
> In the past we've rejected proposed patches for pgbench on the grounds
> that they would make results non-comparable to previous results.

Perhaps we need an option indicating whether or not the use of bigint
columns is OK.

...Robert

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael MeskesDate: 2010-01-29 16:28:55
Subject: Re: out-of-scope cursor errors
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-29 16:19:57
Subject: Re: quoting psql varible as identifier

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