Michael Viscuso <michael.visc...@getcarbonblack.com> writes:
> Greg/Tom, you are correct, these columns should be modified to whatever
> is easiest for Postgres to recognize 64-bit unsigned integers. Would
> you still recommend bigint for unsigned integers? I likely read the
> wrong documentation that suggested bigint for signed 64-bit integers and
> numeric(20) for unsigned 64-bit integers.
Unsigned? Oh, hm, that's a bit of a problem because we don't have any
unsigned types. If you really need to go to 2^64 and not 2^63 then
you're stuck with numeric ... but that last bit is costing ya a lot.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
