Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench

From: Alik Khilazhev <a(dot)khilazhev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench
Date: 2017-11-19 19:53:52
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello Fabien,

Sorry for not responding for long time.

> Two typos:
> - "usinng" -> "using"
> - "a rejection method used" -> "a rejection method is used"
> I'm not sure of "least_recently_used_i", this naming style is not used in pgbench. "least_recently_used" would be ok.
> "..nb_cells.. != ZIPF_CACHE_SIZE", ISTM that "<" is more logical,
> even if the result is the same?


> Maybe the cache overflow could be counted, to allow for a possible warning message in the final report?
Also done. But one question: Should it be done by printing to stdout or stderr ?

> When/if the pgbench tap test patch get through, coverage tests should
> be added.

I have added few tests and I am not sure if they OK or not. It was my first experience with perl and tests in PostgreSQL.

Attachment Content-Type Size
pgbench-zipf-09v.patch application/octet-stream 12.3 KB
unknown_filename text/plain 121 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emre Hasegeli 2017-11-19 20:10:38 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Improve geometric types
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-11-19 19:22:31 Re: Patch to add dependency between client executes and static libraries