Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Wow, check this out:
> 	test=> SELECT CAST (pow(10::numeric, 10000) + 1 AS TEXT)
> It works fine!  I have all the digits, and the trailing 1.0:
> 	000001.0000000000000000
> while SELECT pow(10::numeric, 10000) fails.

That's just about as wacky as can be, because numeric_text() is
implemented on top of numeric_out() ... there's no way that numeric_out
can be delivering the wrong answer if the cast produces the right text.
So somewhere between numeric_out and the delivery to the client,
something's getting confused.  I think it's time you got out your
debugger and started tracing through the backend ...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: Numeric 508 datatype at 2005-12-02 21:19:20 from Bruce Momjian

Responses

• Re: Numeric 508 datatype at 2005-12-02 22:04:23 from Michael Fuhr

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Alvaro Herrera	Date: 2005-12-02 22:04:23
	Subject: Re: Reducing relation locking overhead
Previous:	From: Gregory Maxwell	Date: 2005-12-02 21:23:27
	Subject: Re: generalizing the planner knobs

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: Michael Fuhr	Date: 2005-12-02 22:04:23
	Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2005-12-02 21:19:20
	Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype

pgsql-general by date

Next:	From: Tony Caduto	Date: 2005-12-02 21:43:57
	Subject: Re: was a initdb required from 8.1beta3 -> beta4?
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2005-12-02 21:19:20
	Subject: Re: Numeric 508 datatype