Greg Stark wrote:
> We can always continue tweak the details of the format such as adding
> spaces before the units to make it similar to the pg_size_pretty().
> I'm not sure I like the idea of making it exactly equivalent because
> pg_size_pretty() doesn't print any decimals so it's pretty imprecise
> for smaller values.
That's a reasonable position; I'd be fine with upgrading the
requirements for a text scraping app to handle either "8 kB" or "1.356
kB" if it wanted to share some code to consume either type of info, if
all you did was throw a space in there. I'd suggest either removing the
PB units support from your implementation, or adding it to
pg_size_pretty, just to keep those two routines more like one another in
terms of what they might produce as output given the same scale of input.
Also, a quick comment in the new code explaining what you just said
above might be helpful, just to preempt a similar "how is this different
from pg_size_pretty?" question from popping up again one day.
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-02-15 18:05:30|
|Subject: Re: Explain buffers display units.|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2010-02-15 17:49:46|
|Subject: Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees |