Re: Infinities in type numeric - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Gierth
Subject Re: Infinities in type numeric
Date
Msg-id 87h7vg5fo9.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Infinities in type numeric  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

 [...]
 Tom> so that a finite value should never map to INT[64]_MIN, making it
 Tom> safe to do as you suggest. I agree that distinguishing +Inf from
 Tom> NaN is probably more useful than distinguishing it from the very
 Tom> largest class of finite values, so will do it as you suggest.
 Tom> Thanks!

It would make sense to make sure there's a test case in which at least
one value of all three of: a finite value much greater than 10^332, a
+Inf, and a NaN were all present in the same sort, if there isn't one
already.

-- 
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joshua Drake
Date:
Subject: Serializable wrong?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Infinities in type numeric