| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: custom function for converting human readable sizes to bytes |
| Date: | 2016-01-04 20:48:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20160104204812.GA215912@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> But you could also write SELECT relname FROM pg_class WHERE
> pg_relation_size(oid) > 100 * 1024^3, which is actually fewer
> characters. Maybe pg_size_bytes('100 GB') is easier for some people
> to remember than 100 * 1024^3, but I'm probably not one of those
> people.
Nah, that might work for geek types, but I doubt it's the preferred
spelling for most people. I think the proposal is quite reasonable.
If we were only catering for people who can do 2^10 arithmetic off the
top of their heads, we wouldn't have pg_size_pretty at all, would we?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-01-04 20:49:57 | Re: ALTER TABLE behind-the-scenes effects' CONTEXT |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2016-01-04 20:46:24 | Beginner hacker item: Fix to_reg*() input type |