Re: Performance problems with large telemetric datasets on 7.4.2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Kroeger <andrew(at)sprocks(dot)gotdns(dot)com>
Cc: Sven Clement <sven(at)dsign(dot)lu>, Mark Lewis <mark(dot)lewis(at)mir3(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance problems with large telemetric datasets on 7.4.2
Date: 2007-08-03 22:34:09
Message-ID: 4770.1186180449@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Andrew Kroeger <andrew(at)sprocks(dot)gotdns(dot)com> writes:
> With the table definitions you posted, one of the first things I noticed
> was that the default value for an integer column was a bigint value. I
> did some quick 32-bit math and found that the smallest legal 32-bit
> integer value is -2147483648, not -2147483684 (notice the last 2 numbers
> are transposed).

Oooh, good catch, but 7.4 seems to notice the overflow all right:

regression=# create temp table foo(f1 int default -2147483684::bigint);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# insert into foo default values;
ERROR: integer out of range
regression=# select version();
version
----------------------------------------------------------------
PostgreSQL 7.4.17 on hppa-hp-hpux10.20, compiled by GCC 2.95.3
(1 row)

So I think we can conclude that the OP never actually uses this default.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Carlos H. Reimer 2007-08-04 14:02:26 RES: RES: RES: Improving select peformance
Previous Message Decibel! 2007-08-03 22:17:42 Re: cpu throttling