Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow" - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow"
Date
Msg-id 4947.1525196958@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow"  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow"  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 7:24 PM, David Rowley
> <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> I think we should back patch and try to be consistent about the
>> power(float8 1.0, 'NaN') and power('NaN', float8 0.0) cases. The
>> archives don't show any complaints about power() with NaN until this
>> one, so I imagine the number of people affected by this is small.

> I agree that this is not likely to affect a lot of people -- but the
> question isn't how many people will be affected but rather, of those
> that are, how many of them will be pleased rather than displeased by a
> change.  I would argue that the results have to be unambiguously wrong
> in the back-branches to justify a change there, and this doesn't
> appear to meet that standard. I would guess that the number of people
> who use NaN is very small, but those people have probably adapted
> their application to the behavior they are getting currently.

The point here, I think, is that you get behavior X on approximately 100%
of modern platforms, but (without this patch) behavior Y on some number of
older platforms.  People who have tested their app on a modern platform
and then find that it misbehaves on an old one will think this is a bug
fix.  People who only run their app on an old platform may think the
pre-patch behavior is fine, in which case they will indeed be upset if
we change it in a minor release.  Are there more of the latter than the
former?  I don't really know, and you don't either.  But I don't think
we should discount the existence of the former category.  Deploying
to production on an older release of $system than you develop on
is hardly an unusual scenario.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Fsync request queue
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Fsync request queue