Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Shridhar Daithankar
Тема Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations
Дата
Msg-id 200409291651.31091.shridhar@frodo.hserus.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations  (Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim@gunduz.org>)
Ответы Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Re: About PostgreSQL's limit on arithmetic operations  (Guy Fraser <guy@incentre.net>)
Список pgsql-general
On Wednesday 29 Sep 2004 2:25 pm, Devrim GUNDUZ wrote:
> > template1=# SELECT 512*18014398509481984::numeric(20) AS result;
> >       result
> > ---------------------
> > 9223372036854775808
> > (1 row)
>
> Ok, I got the same result in 7.4.5... But... Why do we have to cast it
> into numeric? The results from other databases shows that they can perform
> it without casting...

Probably because the normal integer is 4 bytes long and bigint is 8 bytes
long. The value above is exactly 2^63 at which a 8 bytes long signed bigint
should flip sign/overflow. I am still puzzled with correct value and negative
sign..

For arbitrary precision integer, you have to use numeric. It is not same as
oracle.

Furthermore if your number fit in range, then numbers like precision(4,0) in
oracle to smallint in postgresql would buy you huge speed
improvement(compared to postgresql numeric I mean)

Please correct me if I am wrong..

 Shridhar

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Marco Colombo
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Null comparisons (was Re: checksum)
Следующее
От: "Najib Abi Fadel"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Multiple Rules :: Postgres Is confused !!