Alvaro, thank you, that worked.
> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:57:38 -0300
> From: alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com
> To: jpablolorenze...@hotmail.com
> CC: t...@sss.pgh.pa.us; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] numeric data type
>
> Juan Pablo L. wrote:
> &g
Juan Pablo L. wrote:
> Hi Alvaro, thank you for your answer, PG_GETARG_NUMERIC does not exist ..
> cant find it in the source code and when running i get
> undefined symbol: PG_GETARG_NUMERIC.
#include "utils/numeric.h"
--
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL
m
> CC: t...@sss.pgh.pa.us; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] numeric data type
>
> Juan Pablo L. wrote:
> > thank you for your answer, the function is declared as:
> >
> > FUNCTION wtt_discount_account(IN in_phonenumber varchar(20),IN in_balanceid
> > i
Juan Pablo L. wrote:
> thank you for your answer, the function is declared as:
>
> FUNCTION wtt_discount_account(IN in_phonenumber varchar(20),IN in_balanceid
> integer,IN in_chgval numeric(10,2))
>
> i chose numeric because is supposed to be better for numbers/money
> operations, supposed to b
precision because that is money, is there any other
way which does not
involve loosing precision ? thankS!!
> From: t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
> To: jpablolorenze...@hotmail.com
> CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] numeric data type
> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015
"Juan Pablo L." writes:
> Hi, i m writing a C module (extension), the procedure has a parameter that
> is of type numeric,
> inside the function i can not read the parameter or so it seems, this what is
> do:
> float8 db_balance,in_chgval;
> in_chgval = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(2);
> elog(INFO,"in_
Hi, i m writing a C module (extension), the procedure has a parameter that is
of type numeric,
inside the function i can not read the parameter or so it seems, this what is
do:
float8 db_balance,in_chgval;
in_chgval = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(2);
elog(INFO,"in_chgval = %0.2f",in_chgval);
The above
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 09:48:52AM -0500, John D. Burger wrote:
> I have a (only vaguely) related question about NUMERICs. I'm using
> someone else's schema to copy data from their DB into mine. They use
> NUMERIC quite a bit, with scale 0, where I would use one of the integer
> types. My que
I have a (only vaguely) related question about NUMERICs. I'm using
someone else's schema to copy data from their DB into mine. They use
NUMERIC quite a bit, with scale 0, where I would use one of the integer
types. My question is whether joining and matching on NUMERIC is
likely to be slower
OK. Thanks for clarification.
- Original Message -
From: "Doug McNaught" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Zlatko Matić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ; "Tony Caduto"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: [GE
Zlatko Matić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, it seems that numeric without parameters (precision, scale) behave
> similar to float, but is much exact. Am I right or I missunderstood?
Right. It's also considerably slower, since floating point
calculations can use the hardware. Unless you're do
similar to float, but is much exact. Am I right or I missunderstood?
Thanks,
Zlatko
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Caduto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Zlatko Matić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] numeri
Is "numeric" data type good choice for a field that
would store integer values in most cases, but sometimes decimal values as
well?
Thanks,
Zlatko
13 matches
Mail list logo
