If you feel strongly about it, go ahead. I didn't see any problem
reports on it, and it seemed kind of iffy, so I thought we should hold
it.
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Comparing NaN/Invalid seems so off the beaten path that we would just
> > wait for 7.2. That and no one has reported a problem with it so far.
>
> Do you consider "vacuum analyze" on the regression database to be
> off the beaten path? How about creating an index on a numeric column
> that contains NaNs, or a timestamp column that contains Invalid?
>
> Unless you believe these values are not being used in the field at all,
> there's a problem. (And if you do believe that, you shouldn't be
> worried about my changing their behavior ;-))
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
