From: | Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding IEEE 754:2008 decimal floating point and hardware support for it |
Date: | 2013-06-12 07:12:55 |
Message-ID: | CADLWmXXizVdi6K4REx98qHfkAPLWbd8KnUohmcSQY4nBLgMhMQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12 June 2013 00:56, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> The main thing I'm wondering is how/if to handle backward compatibility
> with the existing NUMERIC and its DECIMAL alias, or whether adding new
> DECIMAL32, DECIMAL64, and DECIMAL128 types would be more appropriate. I'd
> love to just use the SQL standard types name DECIMAL if possible, and the
> standard would allow for it (see below), but backward compat would be a
> challenge, as would coming up with a sensible transparent promotion scheme
> from 32->64->128->numeric and ways to stop undesired promotion.
>
For what it's worth, DB2 9.5 and later call these types DECFLOAT(16) and
DECFLOAT(34), and they are distinct from DECIMAL/NUMERIC.
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/data/library/techarticle/dm-0801chainani/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2013-06-12 07:19:36 | Re: [PATCH] pgbench --throttle (submission 7 - with lag measurement) |
Previous Message | Yeb Havinga | 2013-06-12 07:12:34 | Re: Parallell Optimizer |