Re: [HACKERS] Numeric overflow problem + patch

On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:16:56PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:11:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > > ! DETAIL: A field with precision 4, scale 4 must have an absolute value less than 1.
> > > [ becomes ]
> > > ! DETAIL: A field with precision 4, scale 4 must have an absolute value less than 1 - 5 * 10^-5.
> >
> > This strikes me as overly pedantic. The message needs to be
> > clear, and the proposed change will just confuse people.
>
> I don't know if the code can detect the difference, but a message
> like:
>
> A field with precision 4, scale 4 must *round to* an absolute value
> less than 1

What does .999 round to? How about .5?

> Since that more accurately describes the actual problem.

I'd say it doesn't, as worded. Maybe some other wording would be
clearer.

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!