| From: | "J(dot) Andrew Rogers" <jrogers(at)neopolitan(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
| Date: | 2005-11-02 01:46:10 |
| Message-ID: | BF8D5A62.6BCF%jrogers@neopolitan.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On 11/1/05 2:38 PM, "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> wrote:
>
> FWIW, most databases I've used limit NUMERIC to 38 digits, presumably to
> fit length info into 1 or 2 bytes. So there's something to be said for a
> small numeric type that has less overhead and a large numeric (what we
> have today).
The 38 digit limit is the decimal size of a 128-bit signed integer. The
optimization has less to do with the size of the length info and more to do
with fast math and fixed structure size.
J. Andrew Rogers
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2005-11-02 03:56:48 | Re: 8.1-compatible xlogdump |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-11-02 01:23:53 | Re: 8.1-compatible xlogdump |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-11-02 04:11:06 | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-11-01 23:19:37 | Re: Partitioning docs |