Re: Numeric numbers

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Francisco Olarte <folarte(at)peoplecall(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Олег Самойлов <olleg(at)mipt(dot)ru> wrote:
> > Hi all. I have silly question. Look at "numeric" type. According to
> > docs it must be "up to 131072 digits before the decimal point; up to
> > 16383 digits after the decimal point". Well, lets see.
> >
> > => select 1::numeric/3;
> > ?column?
> > ------------------------
> > 0.33333333333333333333
>
> => select 1::numeric(100,90)/3;
> ?column?
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> 0.333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
> 333333333333333333333333333333
> (1 row)
>
> It's probably doing 1(integer) => double precioson => numeric(20) or
> something similar if you do not specify.
>
> Francisco Olarte.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

*Franciso,*
*Per the docs, is is not "must be', it is "up to 131072 digits before the
decimal point; up to 16383 digits after the decimal point".*

*https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/datatype-numeric.html#DATATYPE-NUMERIC-TABLE
<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/datatype-numeric.html#DATATYPE-NUMERIC-TABLE>*

*YOU have specified a precision of numeric(100,90), which means 90 decimals
and that is exactly what you got!*

*The result is correct, so what is your question?*

--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.