Re: Reducing the overhead of NUMERIC data

On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 11:26 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 10:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I think we could make it go by cramming the sign and
> >> the high-order dscale bit into the first NumericDigit --- the
> >> digit itself can only be 0..9999 so there are a couple of bits
> >> to spare.
> 
> > I've got a working version of the code using the above scheme,
> 
> Really?  After I woke up a bit more I realized there was only one bit
> and change to spare, not two, so I don't see how it would work.

Not sure why you think that. Seems to fit....

Best Regards, Simon Riggs