Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data
От | Jim C. Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20051101223808.GP20349@pervasive.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data
Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 04:54:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > It might be reasonable to restrict the range of NUMERIC to the point > that we could fit the weight/sign/dscale into 2 bytes instead of 4, > thereby saving 2 bytes per NUMERIC. I'm not excited about the other > aspects of this, though. 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). -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: