BUG #4657: mod() makes a mistake in calculation in v8.3 - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Fujii Masao
Subject BUG #4657: mod() makes a mistake in calculation in v8.3
Date
Msg-id 200902160710.n1G7Am3n082862@wwwmaster.postgresql.org
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: BUG #4657: mod() makes a mistake in calculation in v8.3  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-bugs
The following bug has been logged online:

Bug reference:      4657
Logged by:          Fujii Masao
Email address:      masao.fujii@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.6 on x86_64
Operating system:   Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.1 (Tikanga)
Description:        mod() makes a mistake in calculation in v8.3
Details:

In 8.3, I found the bug of 'mod' function to make an error in calculation
when the second argument is defined as 'numeric'.

postgres=# SELECT version();
                                                  version
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.3.6 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC)
4.1.2 20070626 (Red Hat 4.1.2-14)
(1 row)

postgres=# SELECT mod(70000, 35);
 mod
-----
   0
(1 row)

postgres=# SELECT mod(70000.0, 35.0);
 mod
------
 35.0
(1 row)


On the other hand, in HEAD, mod() seems to work fine.

postgres=# SELECT version();
                                                       version
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
 PostgreSQL 8.4devel on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC)
4.1.2 20070626 (Red Hat 4.1.2-14), 64-bit
(1 row)

postgres=# SELECT mod(70000, 35);
 mod
-----
   0
(1 row)

postgres=# SELECT mod(70000.0, 35.0);
 mod
-----
 0.0
(1 row)

I guess the following change fixed the bug which I found. Right?
Why don't we backport this?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2008-04/msg00030.php

Regards,

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_listener entries deleted under heavy NOTIFY load only on Windows
Next
From: David Newall
Date:
Subject: Re: Lost search_path after transaction fails