Re: GUC time unit spelling a bit inconsistent

On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 20:02 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Montag, 18. Juni 2007 19:03 schrieb Tom Lane:
> > In time-related contexts (eg ISO 8601) I'd expect just "h" "m" and "s".
>
> ISO 8601 appears to use a slightly different syntax for writing timespans. I
> would not object if anyone added support for that.
>
> > Since there's no likelihood that anyone would think autovacuum_naptime
> > is measured in meters, I think insisting that it must not be written as
> > "1m" is just pedantry.
>
> I'm pretty sure a lot of people would initially be confused why anyone would
> write time in meters,

Nobody at all is going to be confused on that point because the physical
quantity of autovacuum_naptime is clearly Time and therefore "m" would
mean minutes. Time and Distance are fairly distinct and not easily
confused, except by those with a grounding in Riemannian manifolds.

All parameters for which we can input a time unit are clearly named as
such and there would be no confusion anywhere.

You are absolutely 100% right about your units and you've clearly done
your homework, but the standard PostgreSQL should apply here is
Usability, not the absolute letter of the law as laid down in a dusty
old document. There is nothing to be gained by adherence to ISO 31 or
ISO 8601, but certainly something to be lost.

Please lets be real about this and allow the abbreviations suggested.

Your efforts to introduce units is excellent and much appreciated by
all; please don't make them harder to use than the plain numbers were.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com