11.11.2016 18:26, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >> - Added new datatypes: DECFLOAT(16) and DECFLOAT(34), using 64/128 bits >> for numbers representation. > > What is the point of these new types? Cannot you just expand list of back-end > storage > for standard DECIMAL?
This is my concern too. What is the user-visible difference between NUMERIC(15) based on blr_int64 and DECFLOAT(15) based on blr_dec64? Are both arithmetics compatible and if not then why? I bet we have a demand for longer standard NUMERICs rather than for non-standard DECFLOAT. Moreover, what are we going to do when people ask as for precisions beyond the 34 decimal digits? Introduce blr_dec256/blr_dec512/etc or switch to blr_varydec backed by decNumber (and probably stored as packed BCD)? Are there any reasons why the current implementation doesn't follow this way other than hardware accelerated computations for 64/128 bits? Dmitry ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
