| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Bort, Paul" <pbort(at)tmwsystems(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GUC with units, details |
| Date: | 2006-07-26 19:56:27 |
| Message-ID: | 44C7C8EB.1000106@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bort, Paul wrote:
>
>> The Linux kernel changed to the standard years ago. And that's just a
>> few more lines of code than PostgreSQL. (
>> http://kerneltrap.org/node/340 and others )
>>
>
> For your entertainment, here are the usage numbers from the linux-2.6.17
> kernel:
>
> kilobyte (-i) 82
> kibibyte (-i) 2
> megabyte (-i) 98
> mebibyte (-i) 0
> gigabyte (-i) 32
> gibibyte (-i) 0
>
> KB 1151
> kB 407
> KiB 181
> MB 3830
> MiB 298
> GB 815
> GiB 17
>
> So I remain unconvinced.
>
> Of course, your general point is a good one. If there are actually
> systems using this, it might be worth considering. But if not, then
> we're just going to confuse people.
>
Is it worth bothering about the small deviation, if 10000 was meant, but
10k gives 10240 buffers? Isn't it quite common that systems round config
values to the next sensible value anyway?
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-07-26 20:04:11 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Provide 8-byte transaction IDs to user level |
| Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2006-07-26 19:51:56 | Re: Allow commenting of variables in postgresql.conf to - |