Re: [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty()

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, thomas(dot)berger(at)1und1(dot)de, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty()
Date: 2016-08-01 18:52:23
Message-ID: 20160801185223.GE28246@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 02:48:55PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 7/30/16 2:16 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > The second patch does what Tom suggests above by outputting only "KB",
> > and it supports "kB" for backward compatibility. What it doesn't do is
> > to allow arbitrary case, which I think would be a step backward. The
> > second patch actually does match the JEDEC standard, except for allowing
> > "kB".
>
> If we're going to make changes, why not bite the bullet and output KiB?
>
> I have never heard of JEDEC, so I'm less inclined to accept their
> "standard" at this point.

I already address this. While I have never heard of JEDEC either, I
have seen KB, and have never seen KiB, hence my argument that KiB would
lead to more confusion than we have now.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-01 18:53:28 Re: pg_size_pretty, SHOW, and spaces
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-01 18:51:03 Re: [BUGS] BUG #14244: wrong suffix for pg_size_pretty()

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-01 18:53:28 Re: pg_size_pretty, SHOW, and spaces
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2016-08-01 18:52:04 Re: New version numbering practices