Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error
От | Maciek Sakrejda |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOtHd0D7XQVGudiYYNRd-4U2TzVQzcCRndKeUar6TsH-mJki=A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error (Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error
Re: [GENERAL] Floating point error |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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).
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: