| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, "Bort, Paul" <pbort(at)tmwsystems(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: GUC with units, details |
| Date: | 2006-07-27 15:56:15 |
| Message-ID: | 200607271756.16092.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jim Nasby wrote:
> The truth is, virtually no one, even highly technical people, ever
> picks nits between kB vs KiB vs KB.
The question isn't so much whether to allow KiB and such -- that would
obviously be trivial. The question is whether we want to have kB mean
1000 bytes instead of 1024 bytes.
In my mind, that goes against current practice. The only argument
raised in favor was that international standards require such use. I'm
as much a fan of measurement standards as anyone, but I'm also a
practitioner of current practice.
This consideration would become much more interesting if *any* software
product actually made use of this newer proposed convention, but so far
I haven't seen one yet.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-07-27 15:57:41 | Re: GUC with units, details |
| Previous Message | Darcy Buskermolen | 2006-07-27 15:44:58 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Provide 8-byte transaction IDs to user level |