| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: numeric/decimal docs bug? |
| Date: | 2002-03-02 17:23:30 |
| Message-ID: | 15073.1015089810@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> In datatype.sgml:
> The type numeric can store numbers of practically
> unlimited size and precision,...
> I think this is simply wrong since the current implementation of
> numeric and decimal data types limit the precision up to 1000.
> #define NUMERIC_MAX_PRECISION 1000
I was thinking just the other day that there's no reason for that
limit to be so low. Jan, couldn't we bump it up to 8 or 16K or so?
(Not that I'd care to do heavy arithmetic on such numbers, or that
I believe there's any practical use for them ... but why set the
limit lower than we must?)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavlo Baron | 2002-03-02 20:01:44 | Re: TODO question |
| Previous Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 2002-03-02 15:47:36 | Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life : NEWS!!! |