The fact that the return type is not consistently of one type bothers
me.  I'm not sure pgbench's expression language is a good place to
runtime polymorphism -- SQL doesn't work that way.

Sure.

Pg has a NUMERIC adaptative precision version, which is cheating, because it can return kind of an "int" or a "float", depending on whether there are digits after the decimal point or not.

Pgbench does not have support for NUMERIC, just INT & DOUBLE, so the current version is an approximation of that.

Now it is always possible to just do DOUBLE version, but this won't match SQL behavior either.

Another point I forgot: pgbench functions and operators are notably interesting to generate/transform keys in tables, which are usually integers, so having int functions when possible/appropriate is desirable, which explain why I pushed for having an int version for POW.

Also, pgbench does not have a static typing model because variable types are not declared "\set i ...", so the type is somehow "guessed" based on the string values, although if in doubt it is always possible to convert (with "int" & "double" functions).

So for me the philosophy is to have expression match SQL behavior when possible, as closely as possible, but it is not an exact match.

--
Fabien.

Reply via email to