Re: effective_cache_size vs units - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Date
Msg-id 20061219083642.GB9627@svr2.hagander.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: effective_cache_size vs units  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: effective_cache_size vs units  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 08:56:22PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 23:46 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > > Oh, you mean MB vs Mb. Man, it had to be that simple :)
> > 
> > ISTM we had discussed whether guc.c should accept units strings in
> > a case-insensitive manner, and the forces of pedantry won the first
> > round.  Shall we reopen that argument?
> 
> I don't think that anyone is going to think, oh I am using 1000 Mega Bit
> of ram. Mb == MB in this case. That being said, it is documented and I
> don't know that it makes that much difference as long as the
> documentation is clear.

Is it possible to add an error hint to the message? Along the line of
"HINT: Did you perhaps get your casing wrong" (with better wording, of
course).

//Magnus


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dave Page
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_restore fails with a custom backup file
Next
From: ITAGAKI Takahiro
Date:
Subject: Re: Dirty pages in freelist cause WAL stuck