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? > Other than that it has all the speed advantages as bigint for > basically the same reasons. It's basically bigint with modified input > and output functions. 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 For numbers at the top end of bigint's range, the speed difference is on the order of 4x (albeit on my 32-bit machine) -- Andrew, Supernews http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
