Re: NUMERIC's transcendental functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: NUMERIC's transcendental functions
Date: 2002-09-23 21:41:50
Message-ID: 5011.1032817310@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> One problem is, that division already has an inherently inexact
> result. Do you intend to rip that out too while at it? (Just
> kidding)

No, but that too is now delivering less precision than it used to:

regression=# select 10.1/7.0;
?column?
--------------
1.4428571429
(1 row)

versus 1.44285714285714 in prior releases.

> Proposal #2.667 would be to have a GUC variable for the default
> precision.

Perhaps, but I'd be satisfied if the default precision were at least
16 digits. Again, the point is not to have any apparent regression
from 7.2.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-09-23 21:42:51 Re: Default privileges for 7.3
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-09-23 21:15:11 Re: Default privileges for 7.3