On 20/09/2015 14:16, Adrian.Vondendriesch wrote: > Hi all, > Hello,
> Am 06.04.2015 um 20:52 schrieb Tom Lane: >> "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I'll let a hacker determine whether this is a bug or a feature >>> request though it is a POLA violation in either case. >> >> I'd say it's a feature request --- a perfectly reasonable one, >> but I doubt we'd alter the behavior of the function in the back >> branches. > > I was also wondering about the described behaviour. IMO > pg_size_pretty should handle negative values the same way as > positive values are handled. > +1 for me, thanks for the patch! > I've attached a patch which implements the requested behaviour. > The patch applies clean to HEAD (currently 85eda7e92). > I just reviewed your patch, everything looks fine for me. Maybe some minor cosmetic changes could be made to avoid declaring too many vars, but I think a committer would have a better idea on this, so I mark this patch as ready for committer. > AFAICS the documentation doesn't say anything about pg_size_pretty > and negative values. So, I didn't touch the documentation. If this > is a oversight by me or should be documented after all, I will > provide a additional documentation patch. > Yes, the documentation didn't say anything about the lack of formattting for negative value. I also don't think a patch is needed here. Regards. > Before the patch: > >> SELECT pg_size_pretty(size), pg_size_pretty(-1 * size) FROM >> (SELECT 100000000000000::bigint) foo(size); pg_size_pretty | >> pg_size_pretty ----------------+------------------------ 91 TB >> | -100000000000000 bytes (1 row) > >> SELECT pg_size_pretty(size), pg_size_pretty(-1 * size) FROM >> (SELECT 100000000000000::numeric) foo(size); pg_size_pretty | >> pg_size_pretty ----------------+------------------------ 91 TB >> | -100000000000000 bytes (1 row) > > After the patch: > >> SELECT pg_size_pretty(size), pg_size_pretty(-1 * size) FROM >> (SELECT 100000000000000::bigint) foo(size); pg_size_pretty | >> pg_size_pretty ----------------+---------------- 91 TB | >> -91 TB (1 row) > >> SELECT pg_size_pretty(size), pg_size_pretty(-1 * size) FROM >> (SELECT 100000000000000::numeric) foo(size); pg_size_pretty | >> pg_size_pretty ----------------+---------------- 91 TB | >> -91 TB (1 row) > > > The patch contains two tests (pg_size_pretty_bigint and > pg_size_pretty_numeric), to verify that positive and negative > values return the same result (except sign). > > Greetings, > > - Adrian > -- Julien Rouhaud http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
