On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Leslie S Satenstein <lsatenst...@yahoo.com> writes: >> A good compromise is to perhaps consider the following. > >> The bigint type should only be used if the integer range is insufficient, >> because calculation with the latter is definitely faster. > > This doesn't seem to me to fix the basic problem, which is that "the > latter" appears to refer to "integer range". You don't calculate with > ranges, but with types. Maybe it should be > > The bigint type should only be used if the range of the integer > type is insufficient, because the latter is definitely faster. > > I'm not that excited about making the text specify that calculations are > faster, because on most modern machines the actual calculation speed > difference is pretty minuscule. What's expensive about bigint is > pushing around twice as much data and/or having to do palloc's.
Yeah, I was actually wondering whether the first step here might be to benchmark this. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
