| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Youngblood <pgcluster(at)netio(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type |
| Date: | 2005-07-28 06:40:15 |
| Message-ID: | 21027.1122532815@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
Gregory Youngblood <pgcluster(at)netio(dot)org> writes:
> On Jul 27, 2005, at 9:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> You'd have to translate that to NUMERIC, which would work but would
>> take a bit of a performance hit ...
> The most common places I've seen unsigned bigint used have been
> primary keys for tables where the counter is expected to basically
> grow forever. I've also seen it used to store unique user id numbers
> instead of varchar fields.
[ shrug... ] So store it as plain bigint. There is not any real
difference between 2^63 and 2^64 available values --- either way,
we'll all be safely dead before overflow occurs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2005-07-28 07:55:56 | Re: MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type |
| Previous Message | Gregory Youngblood | 2005-07-28 04:57:57 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL to PostgreSQL, was ENUM type |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | denis | 2005-07-28 07:18:29 | Re: Postgresql with max_connections=4096 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-28 05:54:47 | Re: Upgrading from 7.1 |