Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

From: Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types
Date: 2018-08-17 18:24:18
Message-ID: CAE2gYzw4gkN+33C-t-Bz8O2uAr12UDE++AWft5EsLBF9UrAi6Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've
> tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected
> file, won't it fail on some other machines?

I had another patch to check for -0 inside float{4,8}_{div,mul}(). I
dropped it on the last set of patches, so the tests were broken. I
get -0 as a result of -x * 0 both on Mac and Linux.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-08-17 18:32:59 Performance improvements for src/port/snprintf.c
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2018-08-17 18:07:13 Re: [HACKERS] WIP: long transactions on hot standby feedback replica / proof of concept