| From: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: to_char, support for EEEE format |
| Date: | 2009-08-08 07:45:09 |
| Message-ID: | 37ed240d0908080045g4700939eg86995c80a43f74b8@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/8/3 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Uh, no, we had better support more. The actual limit of the current
> numeric format is 1e+131072.
>
Given your comment above I'm thinking it reasonable to use an int32 to
store the exponent -- will that be safe?
That would allow for a maximum of 10 exponent digits. As an aside, I
note that int4out() hardcodes the maximum number of digits rather than
exposing a constant (c.f. MAXINT8LEN in int8.c). I'm considering
adding MAXINT2LEN and MAXINT4LEN to int.c in passing. Excessive
tinkering, or worthy improvement?
Cheers,
BJ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2009-08-08 08:30:36 | Re: Split-up ECPG patches |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-08-08 04:17:45 | Re: Alpha releases: How to tag |