| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r |
| Date: | 2011-04-26 17:28:05 |
| Message-ID: | 201104261728.p3QHS5M12508@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range.
>
> This is entirely redundant. You've added "(when the precision is not
> specified)" but that's exactly what the word "otherwise" already
> conveys.
Right, but the old wording was:
otherwise the current implementation of the <type>NUMERIC</type>
is subject to the limits described in <xref
linkend="datatype-numeric-table">.
I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you
could just specify NUMERIC alone. We know you can you can do things
like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to
explicity mention it. Other wording?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-26 17:45:39 | Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-26 17:02:30 | Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r |