Hi, guys, On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/04/2017 07:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>> Alright I see that, but why does my example show a >>> numeric_precision_radix of 10? >> >> >>> Is there some transition point where it goes from base 10 to base 2? >> >> >> In PG, "numeric" always has radix 10, because the underlying >> implementation is decimal, and all other numerical types such as int and >> float have radix 2, because the underlying implementation is binary. >> Other DBMSses could perhaps do it differently. >> >> Hmm ... you could argue that numeric_precision_radix is telling you >> something about the type's arithmetic behavior independently of what >> the particular column's maximum-precision-if-any is. That's not how >> the SQL spec defines it, but that's really what it's doing. >> >>> Also why does the OPs query show anything when the data_type is integer? >> >> >> The point is that our integers are 32-bit integers, not some other size. >> If you try it on bigint or smallint columns, you'll get other answers. > > > Got it thanks, I was being too literal in my interpretation of numeric. So basically what you are all saying is that since the value "32" contains 2 digits: "3" and "2" the column radix will contain "2". And it is not the actual representation of the number 32 the radix applies to. Am I right? But then what purpose does this column solves? Just curious... Thank you. > > >> >> regards, tom lane >> > > > -- > Adrian Klaver > adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
