Re: BUG #2357: docs for mod() are wrong
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #2357: docs for mod() are wrong |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 10775.1143236360@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | BUG #2357: docs for mod() are wrong ("Philip Crotwell" <crotwell@seis.sc.edu>) |
| Ответы |
Re: BUG #2357: docs for mod() are wrong
|
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
"Philip Crotwell" <crotwell@seis.sc.edu> writes:
> It would be nice if mod could directly take a double,
Given the inherent approximate nature of float arithmetic, I'm not sure
this makes a lot of sense. How often do you really do modulo on floats?
> but if not the docs
> should say that the arguments should be NUMERIC
That would be incorrect. We have it for all the exact numeric types.
regression=# \df mod
List of functions
Schema | Name | Result data type | Argument data types
------------+------+------------------+---------------------
pg_catalog | mod | bigint | bigint, bigint
pg_catalog | mod | integer | integer, integer
pg_catalog | mod | integer | integer, smallint
pg_catalog | mod | integer | smallint, integer
pg_catalog | mod | numeric | numeric, numeric
pg_catalog | mod | smallint | smallint, smallint
(6 rows)
I don't see an easy way to cram that statement into the small amount of
space available in the table though :-(
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: