Re: effective_cache_size vs units - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Date
Msg-id 200701021148.27707.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: effective_cache_size vs units  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net>)
Responses Re: effective_cache_size vs units  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: effective_cache_size vs units  ("Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Am Donnerstag, 28. Dezember 2006 13:25 schrieb Jim C. Nasby:
> Yes, and I can't think of a single reason why we'd let people specify
> anything in millibytes, or kilobits.

How about a configuration option related to connection throughput, which is 
typically measured in bits?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] xlog directory at initdb time
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO: Add a GUC to control whether BEGIN inside