From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative |
Date: | 2011-05-31 23:11:59 |
Message-ID: | 3900.1306883519@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Prevent problems by clamping negative penalty values to
>> zero. (Just to be really sure, I also made it force NaNs to zero.)
> Do gistchoose et al expect the triangle function to obey the triangle
> inequality?
Don't think so.
> If so isn't it possible treating NaNs as zero would fail
> that? I'm not sure there's any safe assumption for NaN
Well, leaving it as NaN is almost certain to not work desirably.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2011-05-31 23:57:24 | Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2011-05-31 23:07:12 | Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2011-05-31 23:57:24 | Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2011-05-31 23:07:12 | Re: pgsql: Protect GIST logic that assumes penalty values can't be negative |