| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | neverov(dot)max(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #17329: Aggregate Functions Precision Error |
| Date: | 2021-12-08 21:45:06 |
| Message-ID: | 3688943.1638999906@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Aggregate functions (described here
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/functions-aggregate.html#FUNCTIONS-AGGREGATE-STATISTICS-TABLE)
> that are defined for double precision type suffer from loss of
> significance.
This is pretty much inherent in all uses of float arithmetic.
You might be happier using the numeric type (of course, that's
much slower).
Another possibility, for some aggregates, is to order the inputs
in a way that minimizes error accumulation. For example,
select sum(f1 order by abs(f1)) from ...
I don't know offhand what the best such incantation is for covar_pop;
it might depend on the problem.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | James Pang (chaolpan) | 2021-12-09 03:34:02 | RE: BUG #17326: Postgres crashed when pg_reload_conf() with ssl certificate parameters |
| Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2021-12-08 21:02:56 | BUG #17329: Aggregate Functions Precision Error |