Kosenko Max wrote:
>
>
> I think it's better to try go with single integer. It perfectly fits range
> 12:00:00 midnight, January 1, 0001 Anno Domini (Common Era) to 11:59:59
> P.M., December 31, 9999 A.D. (C.E.) in 100 nanosecond units. And it's good
> idea to store all dates in UTC.
>
> Why do you need second integer?
>
> You can have even a bit better performance (due to smaller size of index)
> in case you will use lower precision 1 second instead of 100 nanoseconds
> or shorter date range (i.e. number of seconds since 1/1/1900 00:00)
>
> Float value will always take 8 bytes to store, integer will depend from
> the size of value. Compound index will be slower than single.
>
That is helpful information, Kosenko. Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Index-performance-using-2-integers-vs.-1-float-tp25165036p25228125.html
Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
