Re: numeric regression test passes, but why?

From: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: numeric regression test passes, but why?
Date: 2018-01-11 12:26:42
Message-ID: 5A575802.1060305@anastigmatix.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 01/11/18 02:07, Tom Lane wrote:

> Hm, it won't help your sanity to know that those cases pass fine
> for me, interactively, on a couple of different machines:
> ...
> You sure you're using a stock build of Postgres? No handmade
> versions of operator ^ lying around?

Interesting thought....

At $work:
postgresql95-server.x86_64 9.5.10-1PGDG.rhel7 @pgdg95

postgres=> select 0.5678 operator(pg_catalog.^) (-85);
ERROR: division by zero
postgres=> select 0.5678::numeric operator(pg_catalog.^) (-85::numeric);
ERROR: division by zero

Also at home in a gentoo 9.5.1 ebuild...
Also in a build from e35dba475a440f73dccf9ed1fd61e3abc6ee61db in git.

All x86_64 ....

-Chap

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-01-11 12:27:36 Re: CUBE seems a bit confused about ORDER BY
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2018-01-11 11:59:09 Re: [HACKERS] Secondary index access optimizations