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

Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench
Date: 2007-10-17 15:47:34
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-patches
"ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> All of filler fields in branches, tellers and history is NULL. It is
> probabbly a mistake because there are fields of char(22-88) in the table
> definitions.
> TPC-B requires at least 100 bytes per row for all tables used in it.

I'm not in favor of changing this.  pgbench has never pretended to be
"really" TPC-B, nor has anyone ever tried to compare its numbers against
other TPC-B numbers.  On the other hand, people *do* compare pgbench
numbers to itself over time, and if we make a change like this it will
break comparability of the results.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2007-10-17 17:35:23
Subject: Re: BUG #3680: memory leak when excuting a SQL "selectcount(id) from chinatelecom;"
Previous:From: ITAGAKI TakahiroDate: 2007-10-17 08:10:07
Subject: BUG #3681: fillers are NULL in pgbench

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-10-17 16:33:22
Subject: Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal whenWALarchivingis enabled
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-10-17 14:07:46
Subject: Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal when WALarchiving is enabled

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group