Re: effective_cache_size vs units - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Benny Amorsen
Subject Re: effective_cache_size vs units
Date
Msg-id m33b6ubm15.fsf@ursa.amorsen.dk
Whole thread Raw
In response to effective_cache_size vs units  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: effective_cache_size vs units  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "TL" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

TL> Personally I don't find the argument about "someday we might want
TL> to support measurements in millibits" to be convincing at all, and
TL> certainly it seems weaker than the argument that "units should be
TL> case insensitive because everything else in this file is". The SQL
TL> spec has to be considered a more relevant controlling precedent
TL> for us than the SI units spec, and there are no case-sensitive
TL> keywords in SQL.

Units simply are not case sensitive. They are just a more or less
random collection of preexisting symbols, because that was easier than
drawing up entirely new ones. Not all are English letters, for one µ
is not. If you upper case a text with units in, the units do not
change with the rest of the text.


/Benny




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: A possible TODO item
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: effective_cache_size vs units