| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Christensen <david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Shinya11(dot)Kato(at)nttdata(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output |
| Date: | 2021-07-08 08:23:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCWTJcZjfqFFxJdTu+s11x1JjEM_CiiecmTny4tWLZEvdQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 at 05:30, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 at 13:31, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > It feels like if we're going to fix this negative rounding thing then
> > we should maybe do it and backpatch a fix then rebase this work on top
> > of that.
Yes, that was my thinking too.
> Here's a patch which I believe makes pg_size_pretty() and
> pg_size_pretty_numeric() match in regards to negative values.
LGTM, except I think it's worth also making the numeric code not refer
to bit shifting either.
> Maybe this plus your regression test would be ok to back-patch?
+1
Here's an update with matching updates to the numeric code, plus the
regression tests.
Regards,
Dean
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| adjust_pg_size_pretty_rounding_for_negative_values-v2.patch | text/x-patch | 7.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2021-07-08 08:26:23 | Re: rand48 replacement |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-07-08 08:02:53 | Re: ERROR: "ft1" is of the wrong type. |