Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Christensen
Тема Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output
Дата
Msg-id CAOxo6XJ+Jje84n-1rZ4y1uHWpRXGW8drtnA5XUdiBQ2in-xwHg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:26 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 21:24, <Shinya11.Kato@nttdata.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 hadn't really thought about that TBH; to me it seemed like an improvement, but I do see that others might not, and adding confusion is definitely not helpful.  That said, it seems like having the code structured in a way that we can expand via adding an element to a table instead of the existing way it's written with nested if blocks is still a useful refactor, whatever we decide the cutoff units should be.
 
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 got motivated to do this due to some (granted synthetic) work/workloads, where I was seeing 6+digit TB numbers and thought it was ugly.  Looked at the code and thought the refactor was the way to go, and just stuck all of the known units in.
 
I really think this change is more likely to upset someone than please someone.

I'd be interested to see reactions from people; to me, it seems a +1, but seems like -1, 0, +1 all valid opinions here; I'd expect more 0's and +1s, but I'm probably biased since I wrote this. :-)
 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: David Christensen
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] expand the units that pg_size_pretty supports on output
Следующее
От: Dmitry Dolgov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions