Re: effective_cache_size vs units - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Date
Msg-id 1167180631.3678.26.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: effective_cache_size vs units  (Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com>)
Responses Re: effective_cache_size vs units
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 22:06 -0800, Steve Atkins wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2006, at 9:50 PM, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> 
> > On 12/19/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> I think we should just accept the strings case-insensitively, too.
> >
> > While acknowledging Peter's pedantically-correct points, I say +1 for
> > ease of use.
> 
> +1. I spend some time walking people through tuning issues
> by phone or IM. Anything that complicates supporting users or
> frustrates users for no actual benefit is a bad thing.
> 
> (And this is unrelated to any theoretical units-aware data type -
> we might well be interested in milliwatts and megawatts in a
> datatype,  but in the configuration file we're unlikely to ever
> need to configure things in units of millibits).

Where we at on this?


Joshua D. Drake


> 
> Cheers,
>    Steve
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
> 
>                http://archives.postgresql.org
> 
-- 
     === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997            http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and
Next
From:
Date:
Subject: SPAR Simple PostgreSQL AddOn Replication System