| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
| Date: | 2005-11-04 21:30:27 |
| Message-ID: | 17615.1131139827@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 10:32:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'd feel a lot happier about this if we could keep the dynamic range
>> up to, say, 10^512 so that it's still true that NUMERIC can be a
>> universal parse-time representation. That would also make it even
>> more unlikely that anyone would complain about loss of functionality.
> Would it be feasable to have a type that satisfies that constraint but
> isn't generally intended for on-disk use? My thought is that this new
> type would be used mostly for casting purposes. Kind of like the
> UNKNOWNNUMBER but easier to do since it'd just be another type.
What exactly would be easier about it? ISTM you just described
UNKNOWNNUMERIC to a T.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-11-04 21:34:35 | Re: Crash during elog.c... |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-11-04 21:25:22 | Re: Assert failure found in 8.1RC1 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-11-04 22:05:07 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-11-04 21:18:18 | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |