Hi! On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:19 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
> I played around with the GUC memory units, specifically to test the new > GUC_UNIT_BYTES flag (commit 6e7baa32): > > $ postmaster -c track_activity_query_size=1024kB > FATAL: 1048576 is outside the valid range for parameter > "track_activity_query_size" (100 .. 102400) > > $ postmaster -c track_activity_query_size=1024MB > FATAL: 1073741824 is outside the valid range for parameter > "track_activity_query_size" (100 .. 102400) > > $ postmaster -c track_activity_query_size=1024GB > FATAL: invalid value for parameter "track_activity_query_size": "1024GB" > HINT: Value exceeds integer range. > > $ postmaster -c track_activity_query_size=1024TB > FATAL: invalid value for parameter "track_activity_query_size": "1024TB" > HINT: Valid units for this parameter are "kB", "MB", "GB", and "TB". > > The first two look OK, but the last two cases seem a bit weird. With 1024 > GB, it would be nice to print the valid range, like in the first two cases. > +1, I also think it would be nice to show units in the valid range. I image that if I would see such message at the first time, then I would try to reverse-engineer units from input value representation in the error message. Displaying units in the valid range would be clarifying for me. The HINT in the last message seems wrong: the hint claims that "TB" is > accepted, yet "1024 TB" was not accepted. Yes, this seems like a bug. I think it should be fixed. > And shouldn't the hint also mention "B", since we accept that now? > Yes, I think "B" should be mentioned in hint. Testing a setting with GUC_UNIT_KB: > > $ postmaster -c work_mem=102400B > FATAL: invalid value for parameter "work_mem": "100000B" > HINT: Valid units for this parameter are "kB", "MB", "GB", and "TB". > > This time the hint is accurate, but why is "B" not accepted here? Seems > inconsistent. +1 ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
