Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Loberant
Subject Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea
Date
Msg-id 1406749447911-5813345.post@n5.nabble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Was this issue ever resolved?
We are now having Nagios checks failing due to the pg_size_pretty function,
and the check runs fine on my local machine 9.1 (fails on 9.2 and 9.3, both
having two pg_size_pretty functions).

Thanks,
Josh



--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/No-pg-size-pretty-numeric-was-not-such-a-hot-idea-tp5710106p5813345.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: New developer TODO suggestions
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: No, pg_size_pretty(numeric) was not such a hot idea