Renumber confusing value for GUC_UNIT_BYTE

It had a power-of-two value, which looks right, and causes the other
values which aren't powers-of-two to look wrong.  But this is tested
for equality and not a bitwise test.

See also:
6e7baa3227
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOG9ApEu8bXVwBxkOO9J7ZpM76TASK_vFMEEiCEjwhMmSLiaqQ%40mail.gmail.com

Author: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20220720145220.GJ12702@telsasoft.com
This commit is contained in:
Peter Eisentraut 2022-09-07 11:03:53 +02:00
parent 0e480385ec
commit 3fe76ab972
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ typedef enum
#define GUC_UNIT_BLOCKS 0x2000 /* value is in blocks */
#define GUC_UNIT_XBLOCKS 0x3000 /* value is in xlog blocks */
#define GUC_UNIT_MB 0x4000 /* value is in megabytes */
#define GUC_UNIT_BYTE 0x8000 /* value is in bytes */
#define GUC_UNIT_BYTE 0x5000 /* value is in bytes */
#define GUC_UNIT_MEMORY 0xF000 /* mask for size-related units */
#define GUC_UNIT_MS 0x10000 /* value is in milliseconds */