| From: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Greatest Common Divisor |
| Date: | 2020-01-20 20:13:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAEZATCVYfH3eGLtLonriE1dSFMmr-4p0jre7VRYaYM2bQ0hZzg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 18:52, Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 20/01/2020 11:28, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> >
> > + <entry>
> > + least common multiple — the smallest strictly positive number
> > + that is an integer multiple of both inputs; returns
> > <literal>0</literal>
> > + if either input is zero
> > + </entry>
>
> In that case should lcm be "...that is an integral multiple..." since
> the numeric version will return numeric?
>
So "integral multiple" instead of "integer multiple"? I think I'm more
used to the latter, but I'm happy with either.
Regards,
Dean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2020-01-20 20:14:47 | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-01-20 19:38:02 | Re: Increase psql's password buffer size |