Обсуждение: Words missing in the following txt
In 8.1.1. Integer Types The ending sentence in the 2nd paragraph reads... The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, because the latter is definitely faster. Integers are bigger or smaller, the sentence could read better if phrased as follows: Use regular integers for fast efficient execution. The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient. ------------------ Regards Leslie Mr. Leslie Satenstein mailto:lsatenstein@yahoo.com mailto leslie.satenstein@itbms.biz / leslies@itbms.biz www.itbms.biz
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Leslie S Satenstein <lsatenstein@yahoo.com> wrote: > In 8.1.1. Integer Types > > The ending sentence in the 2nd paragraph reads... > > The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, because the latter is definitely faster. > > Integers are bigger or smaller, the sentence could read better if phrased as follows: > > Use regular integers for fast efficient execution. The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient. The original phrasing might be a little too cute in the sense that "the latter" could be taken to refer to "the integer range" rather than "the integer data type", but the intended meaning is pretty obvious in context. I think your revised phrasing is more negative about bigints than we actually want to be. I think bigints also provide fast, efficient execution (compare with, say, numeric) but they are not AS fast as integers. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--- On Wed, 12/29/10, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [DOCS] Words missing in the following txt > To: "Leslie S Satenstein" <lsatenstein@yahoo.com> > Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org > Date: Wednesday, December 29, 2010, 6:45 AM > On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 8:28 PM, > Leslie S Satenstein > <lsatenstein@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > In 8.1.1. Integer Types > > > > The ending sentence in the 2nd paragraph reads... > > > > The bigint type should only be used if the integer > range is insufficient, because the latter is definitely > faster. > > > > Integers are bigger or smaller, the sentence could > read better if phrased as follows: > > > > Use regular integers for fast efficient execution. The > bigint type should only be used if the integer range is > insufficient. > > The original phrasing might be a little too cute in the > sense that > "the latter" could be taken to refer to "the integer range" > rather > than "the integer data type", but the intended meaning is > pretty > obvious in context. I think your revised phrasing is > more negative > about bigints than we actually want to be. I think > bigints also > provide fast, efficient execution (compare with, say, > numeric) but > they are not AS fast as integers. > > -- > Robert Haas > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company > > -- > Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs A good compromise is to perhaps consider the following. The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, because calculation with the latter is definitelyfaster.
Leslie S Satenstein <lsatenstein@yahoo.com> writes:
> A good compromise is to perhaps consider the following.
> The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, because calculation with the latter is
definitelyfaster.
This doesn't seem to me to fix the basic problem, which is that "the
latter" appears to refer to "integer range". You don't calculate with
ranges, but with types. Maybe it should be
The bigint type should only be used if the range of the integer
type is insufficient, because the latter is definitely faster.
I'm not that excited about making the text specify that calculations are
faster, because on most modern machines the actual calculation speed
difference is pretty minuscule. What's expensive about bigint is
pushing around twice as much data and/or having to do palloc's.
regards, tom lane
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Leslie S Satenstein <lsatenstein@yahoo.com> writes: >> A good compromise is to perhaps consider the following. > >> The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, because calculation with the latter is definitelyfaster. > > This doesn't seem to me to fix the basic problem, which is that "the > latter" appears to refer to "integer range". You don't calculate with > ranges, but with types. Maybe it should be > > The bigint type should only be used if the range of the integer > type is insufficient, because the latter is definitely faster. > > I'm not that excited about making the text specify that calculations are > faster, because on most modern machines the actual calculation speed > difference is pretty minuscule. What's expensive about bigint is > pushing around twice as much data and/or having to do palloc's. Yeah, I was actually wondering whether the first step here might be to benchmark this. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company