Re: Q: float data type

A copy of this was sent to Phil singer <psinger_at_livingonline.com> (if that email address didn't require changing) On Tue, 07 Sep 1999 22:36:31 +0000, you wrote:

>>
>> >2. Is there any shortcoming in defining a column with float ?
>>
>> I cannot think of any reason for wanting to use a column of type float -- it
>> just doesn't seem as natural as using number(n,m).
>>
>
>If you are going to be doing a calculation where you will be
>adding and subtracting some progressively smaller numbers from
>some progressively larger numbers and need to keep every
>bit of precision available (life annuities are the only thing
>which come to mind) then you will want to use type float.
>

No, I think I would want to use numbers with 38 digits of precision/scale. The Oracle number type has more precision/scale then a float type does.

>For ordinary financial computations, they will not round the
>way fixed point desk calculators do, and will get you in
>trouble with auditors.

--
See http://govt.us.oracle.com/~tkyte/ for my columns 'Digging-in to Oracle8i'... Current article is "Part I of V, Autonomous Transactions" updated June 21'st  

Thomas Kyte                   tkyte_at_us.oracle.com
Oracle Service Industries     Reston, VA   USA

Opinions are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Oracle Corporation Received on Wed Sep 08 1999 - 08:07:35 CDT