Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:06:09 +0200 (CEST)
From: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
cc: Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com>, 
    pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, 
    Dimitri Fontaine <dim@tapoueh.org>
Subject: Re: pgbench - adding pl/pgsql versions of tests
In-Reply-To: <20230815153423.GB2296544@nathanxps13>
Message-ID: <52432287-b496-abd3-edc-4beddbc051f0@mines-paristech.fr>
References: <CAMT0RQR1TNSnSWwd65is=HCDjiP4i25mcDDoctEBEiV8351cMQ@mail.gmail.com> <20230814150737.GA1395427@nathanxps13> <d01513e9-8c19-da5-fabc-845f75377f52@mines-paristech.fr> <20230815153423.GB2296544@nathanxps13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/52432287-b496-abd3-edc-4beddbc051f0%40mines-paristech.fr>
Precedence: bulk


Hello Nathan,

>> I'm unclear about what variety of scripts that could be provided given the
>> tables made available with pgbench. ISTM that other scenari would involve
>> both an initialization and associated scripts, and any proposal would be
>> bared because it would open the door to anything.
>
> Why's that?

Just a wild guess based on 19 years of occasional contributions to pg and 
pgbench in particular:-)

> I'm not aware of any project policy that prohibits such enhancements to 
> pgbench.

Attempts in extending pgbench often fall under "you can do it outside (eg 
with a custom script) so there is no need to put that in pgbench as it 
would add to the maintenance burden with a weak benefit proven by the fact 
that it is not there already".

> It might take some effort to gather consensus on a proposal like this, 
> but IMHO that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Done it in the past. Probably will do it again in the future:-)

> If the prevailing wisdom is that we shouldn't add more built-in scripts 
> because there is an existing way to provide custom ones, then it's not 
> clear that we should proceed with $SUBJECT, anyway.

I'm afraid there is that argument. I do not think that this policy is good 
wrt $SUBJECT, ISTM that having an easy way to test something with a 
PL/pgSQL function would help promote the language by advertising/showing 
the potential performance benefit (or not, depending). Just one function 
would be enough for that.

-- 
Fabien.