Re: effective_cache_size vs units

From: Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet(at)amorsen(dot)dk>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Date: 2007-01-01 19:10:46
Message-ID: m33b6ubm15.fsf@ursa.amorsen.dk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "TL" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

TL> Personally I don't find the argument about "someday we might want
TL> to support measurements in millibits" to be convincing at all, and
TL> certainly it seems weaker than the argument that "units should be
TL> case insensitive because everything else in this file is". The SQL
TL> spec has to be considered a more relevant controlling precedent
TL> for us than the SI units spec, and there are no case-sensitive
TL> keywords in SQL.

Units simply are not case sensitive. They are just a more or less
random collection of preexisting symbols, because that was easier than
drawing up entirely new ones. Not all are English letters, for one µ
is not. If you upper case a text with units in, the units do not
change with the rest of the text.

/Benny

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-01-01 19:23:10 Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-01 19:06:35 Re: A possible TODO item