RE: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Thomas Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: "Michael Meskes" <meskes(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>, "PostgreSQL Hacker" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '=' for types 'numeric' and 'float8'
Date: 2000-02-17 02:37:23
Message-ID: 000601bf78ef$ebc90580$2801007e@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> [mailto:owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
>
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> > One hesitation I have is the performance hit in mixing FLOAT and
> > NUMERIC; I (probably) don't want to make NUMERIC the "best" numeric
> > type, since it is potentially so slow.
>
> I concur --- I'd be inclined to leave FLOAT8 as the top of the
> hierarchy. But NUMERIC could be stuck in there between int and float,
> no? (int-vs-numeric ops certainly must be promoted to numeric...)
>

Is this topic related to the fact that 1.1 is an FLOAT8 constant in
PostgreSQL ?
I've not understood at all why it's OK.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Bitmead 2000-02-17 02:39:10 psql problem
Previous Message Chris Bitmead 2000-02-17 02:34:48 Re: [HACKERS] FYI: BNF for SQL93 and SQL-3