On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:17:42AM +0200, Maciej Gajewski wrote: > 2. INTEGER > > I had to store a record with several uint32. I had to store an awful > lot of them; hundreds GB of data per day. Roughly half of the record > consists of uint32 fields. > Increasing the data type to bigint would mean that I could store 3 > instead of 4 days worth of data on available storage. > Continuing with int4 meant that I would have to deal with the data in > special way when in enters and leaves the DB. It's easy in C: just > cast uint32_t to int32_t. But python code requires more complex > changes. And the web backend too... > > It's suffering either way! > > Just imagine the conversation I had to have with my boss: "Either > we'll increase budged for storage, or we need to touch every bit of > the system".
Did you try 'oid' as an unsigned int4? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
