Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BANLkTikTLu-ykL1_pXMXtpzLbbzS=vyLxw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> > Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range. >> >> This is entirely redundant. You've added "(when the precision is not >> specified)" but that's exactly what the word "otherwise" already >> conveys. > > Right, but the old wording was: > > otherwise the current implementation of the <type>NUMERIC</type> > is subject to the limits described in <xref > linkend="datatype-numeric-table">. > > I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you > could just specify NUMERIC alone. We know you can you can do things > like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to > explicity mention it. Other wording? Oh, good catch. I agree that removing the extra "the" is a good change, but I think you should remove the parenthetical phrase you added. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: