From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: log_min_duration_statement units |
Date: | 2009-04-07 22:43:59 |
Message-ID: | 23945.1239144239@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
>> My English is not as good as yours but here is another try. Personally, I
>> prefer the second one but...
> Great, I used your second version. I had already done some of the ones
> you found, but you had many more. I also used your "0 disables" wording
> consistently in the file. Thanks for the help. Committed.
You know, it suddenly strikes me that this is going in largely the wrong
direction. Wasn't a key part of the reasoning for the GUC units support
to *eliminate* the need for people to know what the underlying
variable's unit is? I certainly think that putting the unit info into
the text descriptions is a seriously bad idea. It makes an already
overly wide view even wider, and the information is 100% redundant with
the "unit" column of the pg_settings view.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-04-07 22:47:41 | Re: log_min_duration_statement units |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-04-07 22:32:09 | Re: log_min_duration_statement units |