Hi Douglas,

yes, different vendors have different limits on the precision, the most extreme probably being PostgreSQL.

But apart from that, the arithmetic is different.

A better option is to implement some optimized fixed precision classes like SQLDecimal38 and SQLDecimal65 + a more general variable precision SQLDecimal. But, as I mentioned, this is something different than Decimal<N>.


Greetings
Raffaello



On 2021-03-31 22:53, Douglas Surber wrote:
Understood. The problem is that right now the only appropriate type for 
non-integer SQL numbers is BigDecimal. It's too big and too slow and lots of 
users avoid it.

Decimal128 supports 34 significant digits. The max precision of SQL numeric 
types varies from vendor to vendor. In SQL Server it is 38. In MySQL it is 65. 
So there are a huge range of values representable in SQL that are not 
representable in Decimal128. BUT, for the vast majority of applications that 
might be tempted to use Decimal128, those non-representable numbers don't 
occur. Currency amounts exceeding 34 decimal digits of precision are an almost 
non-existent minority.

Very few apps will pay the price of using BigDecimal even though it would 
support huge numbers exactly. Instead they find workarounds that are more 
efficient. Decimal128 would be a substantial improvement for those apps.

Douglas

On Mar 31, 2021, at 1:13 PM, Raffaello Giulietti 
<raffaello.giulie...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

I think there's a misunderstanding about the nature of IEEE 754 Decimal<n> 
(e.g., Decimal64), the subject of this thread, and the nature of SQL DECIMAL(p, s).

SQL DECIMAL(p, s) represent *fixed* point decimal numbers, with an overall 
maximum precision p and a scale s, the number of digits to the right of the 
decimal point (both parameters can be selected freely inside some ranges). For 
example, DECIMAL(2, 1) can represent only the values
    -9.9, -9.8, ..., 9.8, 9.9
and that's it.
Thus, the sum 6.6 + 7.7 overflows, as well as the product 2.9 * 4.

IEEE decimals are *floating* point decimal numbers. A hypothetical decimal of 
precision 2 can represent values of the form c*10^q, where integer c meets |c| 
< 100 (that is, max two digits) and integer q is limited in some range. It 
covers the values above and much more, for example, 0.012 (=12*10^(-3)) and -3.4E2 
(=-34*10^1).
The sum 6.6 + 7.7 produces 14 because the mathematical result 14.3 is rounded 
to the closest number of precision 2 (assuming RoundingMode.HALF_EVEN). By the 
same token, the product 2.9 * 4 produces 12, which is 11.6 rounded to 2 digits.
But really, the position of the decimal point is floating.

IEEE decimals and SQL decimals are fundamentally different and ave different 
arithmetic, so I wouldn't recommend using the proposed classes for JDBC.

On the positive side, SQL decimals, are easier to implement if the maximum 
allowed p in DECIMAL(p, s) is reasonable, say 38. But that's another topic.


Greetings
Raffaello

Reply via email to