Re: Issue with point_ops and NaN

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Issue with point_ops and NaN
Date: 2021-03-30 15:02:32
Message-ID: 2840025.1617116552@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 02:47:05PM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
>> I'd say that this is certainly wrong:
>> SELECT point('NaN','NaN') <@ polygon('(0,0),(1,0),(1,1),(0,0)');
>>
>> ?column?
>> ----------
>> t
>> (1 row)

> Yeah that's what I think too, but I wanted to have confirmation.

Agreed --- one could make an argument for either 'false' or NULL
result, but surely not 'true'.

I wonder if Horiguchi-san's patch [1] improves this case.

regards, tom lane

[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/32/2710/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2021-03-30 15:15:07 Re: Refactor SSL test framework to support multiple TLS libraries
Previous Message Greg Rychlewski 2021-03-30 14:33:46 DROP INDEX docs - explicit lock naming