Re: Numeric 508 datatype

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype
Date: 2005-12-02 18:21:05
Message-ID: 4187.1133547665@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I am confused by your use of the term "dynamic" range. From what you
> say above that we are just moving from 1000 to 508 for storage, and that
> computational range would still be 4096?

No, computational range would still be on the order of 10^16G ... in the
computational format, the weight is an int. The restriction to 1000
digits was never anything but an artificial limit. (Of course, you
might not have the patience to actually do any arithmetic with that many
digits, but the point is there was a whole lot of headroom before, and
now there won't be.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Huxton 2005-12-02 18:32:55 Re: accessing text of the query in a rule
Previous Message Gary Horton 2005-12-02 18:08:40 createuser ignores stdin in 8.1.0?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-12-02 18:23:35 Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-12-02 18:03:26 Re: Numeric 508 datatype

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-12-02 18:23:35 Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?
Previous Message Julio César Elizondo 2005-12-02 18:19:49 unsuscribe pgsql-patches