Re: Postgres 11 release notes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Postgres 11 release notes
Date
Msg-id 18049.1526392887@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Postgres 11 release notes  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Postgres 11 release notes  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 15 May 2018 at 08:28, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Consistently return <literal>NaN</literal> for
>> <literal>NaN</literal> inputs to <function>power()</literal>
>> on older platforms (Dang Minh Huong)

> While I'm not in favour of removing Dang's credit here, technically
> this patch was Tom's. The code added in float.c by Dang's patch
> (61b200e2f) was effectively reverted by 6bdf1303.  Dang's regression
> tests remain, so should also be credited along with Tom.

I'm not particularly fussed about getting credit for that.  However,
looking again at how that patch series turned out --- ie, that
we ensured POSIX behavior for NaNs only in HEAD --- I wonder
whether we shouldn't do what was mentioned in the commit log for
6bdf1303, and teach numeric_pow() about these same special cases.
It seems like it would be more consistent to change both functions
for v11, rather than letting that other shoe drop in some future
major release.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq compression
Next
From: "Daniel Verite"
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow COPY's 'text' format to output a header