Re: BUG #8191: Wrong bit conversion
От | Gavin Flower |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #8191: Wrong bit conversion |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 51A95EB5.9000104@archidevsys.co.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #8191: Wrong bit conversion (Gavin Flower <GavinFlower@archidevsys.co.nz>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 01/06/13 13:01, Gavin Flower wrote: > On 01/06/13 12:29, John R Pierce wrote: >> On 5/31/2013 4:29 PM, Gerald Luger wrote: >>> Shouldn't I expect all results to be 000...0001? >>> >>> Otherwise it would be >>> 1 != 1? >> >> SQL's BIT type is big endian, a hangover from its IBM mainframe >> heritage. >> >> >> >> >> > I don't think it has anything to do with byte sex (I know of 3 ways to > store integers in memory, and I suspect there are more !). > > Don't confuse how things are displayed with how they are stored in memory. > > Just that > 1 = two to the power of zero > so it seems logical to start numbering the bits to represent the > powers of 2. > > > Cheers, > Gavin Hmm... On second thoughts, it is strange that the first 2 examples affect bits on the left hand side! So now I think, that all 3 examples should logically be: RESULT: "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001", BUT, But, But... It appears for varchar padding is done on the right hand side, so maybe that is why the first 2examples are as they are (suggestive,not proof!). Cheers, Gavin
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: