From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org> |
Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should "select 'nan'::float = 'nan'::float;" return false as per IEEE 754 |
Date: | 2012-10-28 10:37:41 |
Message-ID: | 508D0AF5.9010000@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/28/2012 11:21 AM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On 28 October 2012 09:43, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> This is how PostgreSQL currently works -
>>
>> test=# select 'NaN'::float = 'NaN'::float as must_be_false;
>> must_be_false
>> ----------
>> t
>> (1 row)
>>
>> I think that PostgreSQL's behaviour of comparing two
>> NaN-s as equal is wrong and Iwe should follow the IEEE 754 spec here
>>
>> As per IEEE 754 a NaN behaves similar to NULL in SQL.
> FWIW there is a note in the documentation about this:
>
> "Note: IEEE754 specifies that NaN should not compare equal to any
> other floating-point value (including NaN). In order to allow
> floating-point values to be sorted and used in tree-based indexes,
> PostgreSQL treats NaN values as equal, and greater than all non-NaN
> values."
I wonder how hard it would be to start treating NaNs as NULLs
so you could say ORDER BY fvalue NULLS AND NANS LAST :)
Hannu
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2012-10-28 10:54:11 | Re: Should "select 'nan'::float = 'nan'::float;" return false as per IEEE 754 |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2012-10-28 10:34:28 | Re: Should "select 'nan'::float = 'nan'::float;" return false as per IEEE 754 |