Re: GUC with units, details - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andreas Pflug
Subject Re: GUC with units, details
Date
Msg-id 44C7C8EB.1000106@pse-consulting.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GUC with units, details  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bort, Paul wrote:
>   
>> The Linux kernel changed to the standard years ago. And that's just a
>> few more lines of code than PostgreSQL. (
>> http://kerneltrap.org/node/340 and others )
>>     
>
> For your entertainment, here are the usage numbers from the linux-2.6.17 
> kernel:
>
> kilobyte (-i)    82
> kibibyte (-i)    2
> megabyte (-i)    98
> mebibyte (-i)    0
> gigabyte (-i)    32
> gibibyte (-i)    0
>
> KB        1151
> kB        407
> KiB        181
> MB        3830
> MiB        298
> GB        815
> GiB        17
>
> So I remain unconvinced.
>
> Of course, your general point is a good one.  If there are actually 
> systems using this, it might be worth considering.  But if not, then 
> we're just going to confuse people.
>   
Is it worth bothering about the small deviation, if 10000 was meant, but 
10k gives 10240 buffers? Isn't it quite common that systems round config 
values to the next sensible value anyway?

Regards,
Andreas




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Redefined Horizons"
Date:
Subject: An appropriate place for UDF questions?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Provide 8-byte transaction IDs to user level