Re: Float/Double cast to int
| От | Feng Tian |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Float/Double cast to int |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFWGqntnhR+0JPAh=ffayywp_nsmvuDEAygVKpKts3DVHdzYMg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Float/Double cast to int (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Float/Double cast to int
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Ah, thanks! I did not realize numeric comes into play. But, this is even more interesting -- I would expect numeric is more consistent than float/double when dealing with stuff like rounding.
I missed the not too long ago discussion, :-) Regardless of the mechanisms underneath, it would be quite hard to explain this behavior to customer. Maybe it is time to be brave, and be compatible with reality instead of backward?
Best,
Feng
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
rint() is doing what the IEEE spec says, ie round to nearest even.Feng Tian <ftian@vitessedata.com> writes:
> Here is a query, server was built witch GCC on Linux, AMD64.
> ftian=# select 1.5::int, 1.5::double precision::int, 314.5::int,
> 314.5::double precision::int;
> int4 | int4 | int4 | int4
> ------+------+------+------
> 2 | 2 | 315 | 314
> (1 row)
> I believe this is because rint is broken -- can some expert on IEEE754
> please help confirm that this is a bug?
Your third expression is doing numeric-to-int, and that code doesn't
obey the IEEE spec. We've had discussions (not too long ago) about
making these behaviors more consistent, but people seem to be too
afraid of backwards-compatibility problems if we change it.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: