| From: | Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres do not support tinyint? |
| Date: | 2025-01-08 05:24:21 |
| Message-ID: | CANzqJaCxZK0j8fL-riZpX+AV+kyo9PcAvgF=H5DgaWK+C+66Vw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 12:06 AM Igor Korot <ikorot01(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi, ALL,
> According to https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/datatype-numeric.html,
> the
> smallest numeric type supports numbers from -32768 to 32767/
>
> My data will be in a range of [0..4], and so I guess my DB table will waste
> space, right?
>
1. It's not 1994 anymore, when 8M rows was enormous.
2. Record structures are padded by word size, so tinyint wouldn't matter
unless you specifically ordered the fixed width columns from largest to
smallest size when creating the table.
3. The "bit" type might serve your needs.
--
Death to <Redacted>, and butter sauce.
Don't boil me, I'm still alive.
<Redacted> lobster!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Igor Korot | 2025-01-08 06:26:32 | Re: Postgres do not support tinyint? |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2025-01-08 05:20:56 | Re: Postgres do not support tinyint? |