|From:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|To:||Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Fedorov <petr(dot)fedorov(at)phystech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> One problem (other than perhaps performance, tbd.) is that this would no
> longer allow processing infinite timestamps, since numeric does not
> support infinity. It could be argued that running extract() on infinite
> timestamps isn't very useful, but it's something to consider explicitly.
I wonder if it's time to fix that, ie introduce +-Infinity into numeric.c.
This isn't the first time we've seen issues with numeric not being a
superset of float, and it won't be the last.
At first glance there's no free bits in the on-disk format for numeric,
but we could do something by defining the low-order bits of the header
word for a NaN to distinguish between real NaN and +/- infinity.
It looks like those bits should reliably be zero right now.
regards, tom lane
|Next Message||PG Bug reporting form||2020-05-25 15:43:14||BUG #16460: Error when executing REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW WITH DATA;|
|Previous Message||Peter Eisentraut||2020-05-25 13:28:54||Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch|
|Next Message||Tom Lane||2020-05-25 13:52:13||Re: repeat() function, CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(), and unlikely()|
|Previous Message||Victor Yegorov||2020-05-25 13:41:49||Re: Failure to create GiST on ltree column|