Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error
От | Albe Laurenz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error |
Дата | |
Msg-id | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B057BB09A@ntex2010a.host.magwien.gv.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error (Maciek Sakrejda <m.sakrejda@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Maciek Sakrejda wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 12:03 AM, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> wrote: >> I don't think that it is about looking nice. >> C doesn't promise you more than FLT_DIG or DBL_DIG digits of >> precision, so PostgreSQL cannot either. >> >> If you allow more, that would mean that if you store the same >> number on different platforms and query it, it might come out >> differently. Among other things, that would be a problem for >> the regression tests. > > Thank you: I think this is what I was missing, and what wasn't clear > from the proposed doc patch. But then how can pg_dump assume that it's > always safe to set extra_float_digits = 3? Why the discrepancy between > default behavior and what pg_dump gets? It can't know whether the dump > is to be restored into the same system or a different one (and AFAICT, > there's not even an option to tweak extra_float_digits there). How about this elaboration? Yours, Laurenz Albe
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: