Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3

From: Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>
To: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3
Date: 2007-06-18 15:24:16
Message-ID: 4676A3A0.2090509@gmx.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> The objections to applying this patch originally were:
>> 2. it would restrict number of digits to 508 and there are allegedly
>> some people that want to store > 508 digits.
>>
> If 508 digits are not enough, are1000 digits be sufficient? Both limits
> appear quite arbitrary to me.

This 1000 is just a restriction on the typmod of numeric.

You can still use a much higher number of digits, if you use
unconstrained numeric:

test=> create table test (n numeric);

CREATE TABLE
test=> insert into test values (10::numeric ^ 99999);
INSERT 0 1
test=> select length(n) from test;
length
--------
100017
(1 row)

Best Regards
Michael Paesold

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-06-18 15:32:41 Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2007-06-18 15:19:01 Re: Reducing NUMERIC size for 8.3