| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New pgbench functions are misnamed |
| Date: | 2016-05-05 17:43:37 |
| Message-ID: | 21773.1462470217@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I noticed that commit 7e137f846 added functions named max() and min()
>> to pgbench's expression syntax. Unfortunately, these functions have
>> zilch to do with what max() and min() do in SQL. They're actually more
>> like the greatest() and least() server-side functions.
>>
>> While I can't imagine that we'd ever want to implement true aggregates
>> in pgbench expressions, it still seems like this is a recipe for
>> confusion. Shouldn't we rename these to greatest() and least()?
> Yeah, that's probably a good idea.
The vote seems to be 2 to 1 in favor, so I'll go do this.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-05 17:49:53 | Re: Initial release notes created for 9.6 |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-05-05 17:36:44 | Re: Initial release notes created for 9.6 |