Re: Long Integers and Oracle Numbers

Hi darren,

Documentation is right.

Number(10) can't provide better performance than number(38). Rather it's a ristriction on the column.

As for internal format, for example, number 1234 will be store in a format like 1.234x10^3. You can refer Oracle server concepts for detail info.

Hth
bjin

darren_reynolds1118_at_my-dejanews.com wrote:

> I'm used to working with systems where you worry about the speed of
> execution. If you have a field you know will only ever hold values 0-255, you
> call it a Byte. 0-~2bn is a Long Integer.
>
> So along came Oracle 8, and I had to design a data model. All the
> documentation says that for any integer, you should use Number(38). According
> to the same documentation, this is allows for the storage of up to 38 digits,
> with decimal point anywhere. Now, I know that this will probably work, but it
> doesn't sound like a terribly optimal way of going about storing a 32-bit
> Long Integer.
>
> Does anyone know anything about how Oracle handles Number fields internally?
> Is there anything to be gained by using, say Number(10) over Number(38), and
> ignoring the documentation?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Darren Reynolds,
> Halifax plc, England
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Received on Fri Mar 19 1999 - 03:52:55 CST