Re: [PATCHES] guc

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Liam Stewart <liams(at)redhat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] guc
Date: 2002-01-18 05:48:46
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0201180038480.725-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane writes:

> Indeed. Does that mean you'd be happy with restricting the number of
> digits printed for geometrical types only?

Not really. I'd much rather see the EPSILON removed/revised. I don't
claim to understand numerical analysis, but that thing is completely
bogus. I can see how the error would be controllable when you just add
numbers, but once you start multiplying or run trigonometric functions, a
fixed epsilon just doesn't cut it.

If you want to limit the number of digits, why not just reimplement the
geometric types as single precision?

And if we think that an epsilon-based float comparison is important, why
don't we do it everywhere?

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-01-18 05:53:25 Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2002-01-18 05:45:47 Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message sugita 2002-01-18 06:11:14 Segmentation fault of psql unset
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-01-18 05:21:02 Re: [PATCHES] guc