Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!!
От | D'Arcy J.M. Cain |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!! |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020302131924.6B44F1BBC@druid.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!! (Jean-Paul ARGUDO <jean-paul.argudo@IDEALX.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On March 1, 2002 01:44 pm, Jean-Paul ARGUDO wrote: > I analyzed this source and found that NUMERIC types are much most > expensive than simple INTEGER. > > I really fall on the floor.. :-( I was sure with as good quality PG is, > when NUMERIC(x) columns are declared, It would be translated in INTEGER > (int2, 4 or 8, whatever...). > > So, I made a pg_dump of the current database, made some perl > remplacements NUMERIC(x,0) to INTEGER. > > I loaded the database and launched treatments: the results are REALLY > IMPRESIVE: here what I have: Any chance you can try it with the MONEY type? It does use integers to store the data. It isn't really designed for general numeric use but it would be interesting to see how it fares. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: