Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
Date: 2014-01-09 17:09:09
Message-ID: 3262.1389287349@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> For float 4 and float8, wasn't the consensus that the potential
> lossy-ness of addition makes this impossible anyway, even without the
> NaN issue? But...

Well, that was my opinion, I'm not sure if it was consensus ;-).
But NaN is an orthogonal problem I think. I'm not sure whether it
has analogues in other data types.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2014-01-09 17:15:37 Re: Standalone synchronous master
Previous Message Marko Tiikkaja 2014-01-09 17:08:27 Re: array_length(anyarray)