Re: NUMERIC data type always takes up 22 bytes. Alternatives?

Don't know if you can control allocation of numbers, but have you considered just putting them in char? There are major downsides (converting), but perhaps you can live with them. A long time ago I think I remember someone saying that indexes on numbers are faster than char. regards,
ep

On 20 Oct 2000, at 12:40, Val_Gamerman/Victoria_Financi wrote:

Date sent:      	Fri, 20 Oct 2000 12:40:56 -0800
To:             	Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
Send reply to:  	ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com
From:           	Val_Gamerman/Victoria_Financial.VICTORIA_FINANCIAL_at_lnn.com
Subject:        	NUMERIC data type always takes up 22 bytes. Alternatives?

> In all the years that I have dealt with Oracle (both as a developer and a
> DBA -- altogether 3 years) I never stopped to pay much attention to the
> fact that when you define a field in a table as NUMERIC, no matter what
> precision and scale you define for it, you are always going to get 22 bytes
Received on Fri Oct 20 2000 - 16:24:13 CDT