RE: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8' - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject RE: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'
Date
Msg-id 000601bf78ef$ebc90580$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'
Re: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'
List pgsql-hackers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
>
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> > One hesitation I have is the performance hit in mixing FLOAT and
> > NUMERIC; I (probably) don't want to make NUMERIC the "best" numeric
> > type, since it is potentially so slow.
>
> I concur --- I'd be inclined to leave FLOAT8 as the top of the
> hierarchy.  But NUMERIC could be stuck in there between int and float,
> no?  (int-vs-numeric ops certainly must be promoted to numeric...)
>

Is this topic related to the fact that 1.1 is an FLOAT8 constant in
PostgreSQL ?
I've not understood at all why it's OK.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue@tpf.co.jp



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Maximum columns for optimum performance (fwd)
Next
From: Chris Bitmead
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] FYI: BNF for SQL93 and SQL-3