Thanks Jan. I finally figured out that searching for data type in the help file explained integer types. That explains part of my problem. It would handle a few 10 digit number but failed to work for a number like 9486010001 or 9,486,010,001. I am also concatenating two values together to create a unique value in the table and could use a text value. I thought text values were slower as an index than an integer value which is why I tried to use an integer. It worked for about 95% of the data :( Bill
>>> "jan johansen" <[email protected]> 7/10/2009 11:09 AM >>> Bill, I ran into this problem a couple of months ago. On the face value you would think it would hold what you needed. My challenge was I needed to create an invoice number for an automatic process. The idea was to take the 4 digit cust id and add the 6 digit date to it. So an invoice for customer 2090 and today would look like this. 2090090710 However an R:BASE integer is defined as such INTEGER ·Holds whole numbers in the range of ±1,999,999,999 ·Delimiters (such as commas) cannot be used in entry ·R:BASE reserves four bytes of internal storage space So my converted would look like this to R:BASE 2,090,090,710 which exceeds the maximum definintion for an integer. Explains the problem but doesn't help you right now. Jan Johansen Authorized R:BASE Developer -----Original Message----- From: "Bill Niehaus" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] (RBASE-L Mailing List) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:57:45 -0500 Subject: [RBASE-L] - Large integer values in Rbase v8 I am trying to track some large numbers and planned to use an integer type. The number can be 10 digits long but can not have any decimal values (all whole numbers). It seems like an integer works ok for an 9 digit number but does not work for a 10 digit number. I'm not sure how I can confirm this. Should an integer handle a 10 digit number and if not, what is a better option for a 9 digit number. Thanks. Bill
