On 26-05-2012 01:45, Fujii Masao wrote: > Ouch! But removing pg_size_pretty(numeric) causes another usability > issue, e.g., pg_size_pretty(pg_xlog_location_diff(...)) fails. So how about > removing pg_size_pretty(bigint) to resolve those two issues? > I guess pg_size_pretty(numeric) is a bit slower than bigint version, but > I don't think that such a bit slowdown of pg_size_pretty() becomes > a matter practically. No? > That's what I proposed at [1]. +1 for dropping the pg_size_pretty(bigint).
[1] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4f315f6c.8030...@timbira.com -- Euler Taveira de Oliveira - Timbira http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
