Re: Numeric 508 datatype

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype
Date: 2005-11-17 15:57:33
Message-ID: 437CA86D.4090309@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches


>
> Hm, so if this patch is applied now, and in 5 months or so somebody
> implements pg_upgrade, this numeric storage patch would be rolled back?
> OTOH, an upgrade mechanism that's compatible for future 8.3+ versions
> only seems not too attractive.
With Slony and Replicator I don't really see the need for in place
upgrades.

Joshua D. Drake

> A solution might be to keep the current numeric implementation under a
> different name (deprecatednumeric or so), for backward compatibility
> (this should apply to future storage format changes as well).
>
> Regards,
> Andreas
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message codeWarrior 2005-11-17 16:03:57 Re: Very slow queries on 8.1
Previous Message codeWarrior 2005-11-17 15:51:19 Re: Most significant digit number formatting

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-11-17 15:58:30 Re: CLUSTER and clustered indices
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2005-11-17 15:45:48 Re: CLUSTER and clustered indices

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2005-11-17 16:02:07 Re: Numeric 508 datatype
Previous Message Andreas Pflug 2005-11-17 14:49:10 Re: Numeric 508 datatype