From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)nttdata(dot)com |
Cc: | David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output |
Date: | 2021-06-15 13:26:34 |
Message-ID: | CAApHDvp9ym+RSQNGoSRPjH+j6TJ1tFBhfT+JoLFf_RbZq1EszQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 21:24, <Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)nttdata(dot)com> wrote:
> Hmmm, I didn't think YB was necessary, but what do others think?
For me personally, without consulting Wikipedia, I know that Petabyte
comes after Terabyte and then I'm pretty sure it's Exabyte. After
that, I'd need to check.
Assuming I'm not the only person who can't tell exactly how many bytes
are in a Yottabyte, would it actually be a readability improvement if
we started showing these units to people?
I'd say there might be some argument to implement as far as PB one
day, maybe not that far out into the future, especially if we got
something like built-in clustering. But I just don't think there's any
need to go all out and take it all the way to YB. There's an above
zero chance we'll break something of someones by doing this, so I
think any changes here should be driven off an actual requirement.
I really think this change is more likely to upset someone than please someone.
Just my thoughts.
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Isaac Morland | 2021-06-15 13:30:51 | Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2021-06-15 13:24:30 | Re: Case expression pushdown |