1

This question already has an answer here:

I found out, that if you have a field defined as INT(8) without ZEROFILL it will behave exactly as INT(5)

in both cases the maximum value is

−2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647, from −(2^31) to 2^31 − 1

or do i miss something?

I found this Question: https://dba.stackexchange.com/a/370/12923

The (5) represents the display width of the field. From the manual, it states:

The display width does not constrain the range of values that can be stored in the column. Nor does it prevent values wider than the column display width from being displayed correctly. For example, a column specified as SMALLINT(3) has the usual SMALLINT range of -32768 to 32767, and values outside the range permitted by three digits are displayed in full using more than three digits.

The display width, from what I can tell, can be used to left-pad numbers that are less than the defined width. So 00322, instead of 322. TBH, I've never used it.

But it doesn't affect the storage size of the column. An int will take up more space than a smallint.

so there seems to be no difference then.

marked as duplicate by Paul White, RolandoMySQLDBA, Mark Storey-Smith, Max Vernon, Kin Shah Feb 6 '14 at 20:18

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    so I assume, I am right here: there is no difference. Only if I would use ZEROFILL, there would show a different behaviour in smaller numbers – rubo77 Feb 9 '13 at 11:58
0

See 12.2 Numeric Types (MySQL Reference Manual)

Essentially what you listed is the max value for INT and not BIGINT.

  • INT(8) is the equivalent of typing INT with a display width of 8 digits
  • INT(4) is the equivalent of typing just INT with 4 display lengths.

The range of BIGINT is -9223372036854775808 to 9223372036854775807 or 0 to 18446744073709551615.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.