Re: storage size of "bit" data type..

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: "Vyacheslav Kalinin" <vka(at)mgcp(dot)com>
Cc: "Michael Glaesemann" <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, "Alex Mayrhofer" <axelm(at)nona(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: storage size of "bit" data type..
Date: 2007-12-06 23:34:25
Message-ID: 6D69367B-D029-4E58-AF8F-13EF7B59F427@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Dec 6, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Vyacheslav Kalinin wrote:
> > It needs to store the number of bits present as well
>
> Couldn't that be reduced to 1 byte that'd say how many bits count
> in the last byte?
>
> > Only in the sense that numeric also has to store some meta data
> as well like
> the weight and display precision.
>
> Is it really necessary to store display precision when it can be
> taken from the table column definition?

Two problems...

1) CREATE TABLE n(n numeric);

2) The knowledge of extra type information (ie: the numbers in char()
or numeric()) don't extend deeply enough into the code. This is part
of why char() uses the exact same storage mechanism as varchar().
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2007-12-06 23:35:13 Re: storage size of "bit" data type..
Previous Message Chris Velevitch 2007-12-06 23:29:53 Re: Understanding how partial indexes work?