Re: GUC time unit spelling a bit inconsistent

>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at  5:21 PM, in message
<200706202221.l5KMLf805760@momjian.us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

> Gregory Stark wrote:
>>
>> Could you expand on your logic here? And why you disagree with my argument
>> that which abbreviations are correct is irrelevant in deciding whether we
>> should accept other abbreviations.
>
> I suppose the idea is that we don't want to be sloppy about accepting
> just anything in postgresql.conf.  I think people are worried that an
> 'm' in one column might mean something different than an 'm' in another
> column, and perhaps that is confusing.
If we want precision and standards, I would personally find ISO 8601 4.4.3.2 less confusing than the current
implementation. (You could say 'PT2M30S' or 'PT2,5M' or 'PT2.5M' to specify a 2 minute and 30 second interval.)  That
said,I'd be OK with a HINT that listed valid syntax.  I've wasted enough time looking up the supported abbreviations to
lastme a while. 
-Kevin