Re: Numeric 508 datatype - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Numeric 508 datatype
Date
Msg-id 4187.1133547665@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Numeric 508 datatype  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Numeric 508 datatype  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I am confused by your use of the term "dynamic" range.  From what you
> say above that we are just moving from 1000 to 508 for storage, and that
> computational range would still be 4096?

No, computational range would still be on the order of 10^16G ... in the
computational format, the weight is an int.  The restriction to 1000
digits was never anything but an artificial limit.  (Of course, you
might not have the patience to actually do any arithmetic with that many
digits, but the point is there was a whole lot of headroom before, and
now there won't be.)

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Julio César Elizondo
Date:
Subject: unsuscribe pgsql-patches
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should libedit be preferred to libreadline?