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

Re: GUC with units, details

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GUC with units, details
Date: 2006-07-26 13:44:08
Message-ID: 1306.1153921448@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That seems OK for SHOW, which is mainly intended for human
>> consumption, but what will you do with pg_settings?  For programmatic
>> use I think we want more predictable behavior.

> I'd think that a program would not care.  Or do you want a units-free 
> display that can be parsed as integer?

Yeah.  If the value might be shown as either "99kB" or "9MB" then a
program *must* have a pretty complete understanding of the units system
to make sense of it at all.  Furthermore this is not backwards
compatible --- it'll break any existing code that inspects pg_settings
values.  I suggest that the values column should continue to display
exactly as it does today (ie, the integer value in the var's native
units) and we just add a column saying what the native units are.

> Do we want to introduce a difference between pg_settings and SHOW ALL?  

Yup, I think that's the lesser of the evils.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-07-26 13:58:19
Subject: Re: Resurrecting per-page cleaner for btree
Previous:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2006-07-26 12:04:58
Subject: Re: INSERT ... RETURNING in 8.2

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group