Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Is it necessary to rewrite table while increasing the scale of datatype numeric？

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, wangshuo(at)highgo(dot)com(dot)cn, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [HACKERS] Is it necessary to rewrite table while increasing the scale of datatype numeric？
Date: 2013-09-06 19:21:14
Message-ID: CAMkU=1xpGYWo_jQcfaUrmk2+=JE6TsZc8u6xTB=pH_2-iVM8Rg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
>
>
> But I wonder if we could just declare that that's not what the scale typmod
> does. That it's just a maximum scale but it's perfectly valid for NUMERIC
> data with lower scales to be stored in a column than the typmod says. In a
> way the current behaviour is like bpchar but it would be nice if it was more
> like varchar

I agree that this makes more sense than what is currently done. But
are we going to break backwards compatibility to achieve it? Do the
standards specify a behavior here?

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2013-09-06 19:40:46 Re: dynamic shared memory
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-09-06 19:17:37 Re: Hstore: Query speedups with Gin index