Re: int8 version of NUMERIC? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruno Wolff III
Subject Re: int8 version of NUMERIC?
Date
Msg-id 20040112152816.GA21007@wolff.to
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: int8 version of NUMERIC?  (David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com>)
Responses Re: int8 version of NUMERIC?  (Adam Witney <awitney@sghms.ac.uk>)
List pgsql-general
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 21:53:09 +0700,
  David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com> wrote:
>
> My concern is that, the PostgreSQL docs says NUMERIC & DECIMAL is very
> slow compared to INT/BIGINT. Should I worry about that?

Most likely disk IO not cpu will be your bottleneck and the extra overhead
of numeric relative to int or float won't be a big deal.

Numeric is stored usingh based 10000 (at least in 7.4.x) and hence isn't
that horrible performance-wise (as compared to say storing it as an ascii
string).

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: joseph speigle
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreeSQL C header files
Next
From: David Garamond
Date:
Subject: Re: Drawbacks of using BYTEA for PK?