From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Explain buffers display units. |
Date: | 2010-02-15 17:55:20 |
Message-ID: | 4B798A88.6000503@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark wrote:
> We can always continue tweak the details of the format such as adding
> spaces before the units to make it similar to the pg_size_pretty().
> I'm not sure I like the idea of making it exactly equivalent because
> pg_size_pretty() doesn't print any decimals so it's pretty imprecise
> for smaller values.
>
That's a reasonable position; I'd be fine with upgrading the
requirements for a text scraping app to handle either "8 kB" or "1.356
kB" if it wanted to share some code to consume either type of info, if
all you did was throw a space in there. I'd suggest either removing the
PB units support from your implementation, or adding it to
pg_size_pretty, just to keep those two routines more like one another in
terms of what they might produce as output given the same scale of input.
Also, a quick comment in the new code explaining what you just said
above might be helpful, just to preempt a similar "how is this different
from pg_size_pretty?" question from popping up again one day.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.us
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-02-15 18:05:30 | Re: Explain buffers display units. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-15 17:49:46 | Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees |