Any problem with the Long Integer type?

Hello

2010/6/26 <wei725@lycos.com>:

About four five years ago, I had received a few of emails about the data type problems on this mailing list. I believe that the problem was about a performance issue. Is any problem withe the Long Integer type in the late releases?

There is no reason why Long can be slower. Maybe you are thinking
Numeric data type.

Regards

Pavel Stehule

On 6/26/2010 1:25 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

Hello

2010/6/26<wei725@lycos.com>:

About four five years ago, I had received a few of emails about the data type problems on this mailing list. I believe that the problem was about a performance issue. Is any problem withe the Long Integer type in the late releases?

There is no reason why Long can be slower. Maybe you are thinking
Numeric data type.

Actually as I understand it, if they are running 32bit it is
theorectically slower.

JD

2010/6/27 Joshua D. Drake <jdrake@postgresql.org>:

On 6/26/2010 1:25 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

Hello

2010/6/26<wei725@lycos.com>:

About four five years ago, I had received a few of emails about the data
type problems on this mailing list. I believe that the problem was about a
performance issue. Is any problem withe the Long Integer type in the late
releases?

There is no reason why Long can be slower. Maybe you are thinking
Numeric data type.

Actually as I understand it, if they are running 32bit it is theorectically
slower.

aha - I undestand now. It could be - but from 8.3 the overhead is
relative small.

Regards

Pavel Stehule