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

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 (view raw or flat)
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 ยต
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

pgsql-hackers by date

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

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