On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:14:10 -0000 Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2006-09-15, "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:17:55 -0000 > > Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Presumably the same speed as bigint, which is to say that while it is > >> faster than numeric for calculation, it is (much) slower for input/output. > >> (The difference in speed between bigint output and numeric output is > >> measured in multiples, not in percentages.) > > > > I/O for money seems at least as compareable to numeric if not slightly > > better. > > Seems? Have you benchmarked it?
Not rigourously but a few "ANALYZE EXPLAIN" statements bear out this observation. > The point is that bigint is _not_ faster than numeric for I/O (in fact > even integer is not faster than numeric for output). > > Numbers from an actual benchmark: > > int4out(0) - 0.42us/call > numeric_out(0) - 0.32us/call > > int4out(1000000000) - 0.67us/call > numeric_out(1000000000) - 0.42us/call Whay benchmark is this? Perhaps I can modify it to include my new implementation. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match