Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 15:37, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Why would it be useful to use pg_size_pretty on xlog locations?
>> -1 because of the large expense of bigint->numeric->whatever conversion
>> that would be added to existing uses.
> Given the expense, perhaps we need to different (overloaded) functions instead?
That would be a workable solution, but I continue to not believe that
this is useful enough to be worth the trouble.
regards, tom lane