Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
>> No, I don't think so. It doesn't seem to be something that enough
>> people use to risk the change in behavior --- it might break something
>> that was working. But, if folks want it backported we can do it. It is
>> only a change to properly do modulus for numeric.
> Well, from my point of view it's an absolute mathematical error - i'd
> backport it. I can't see anyone relying on it :)
Doesn't this patch break the basic theorem that
a = trunc(a / b) * b + (a mod b)
? If division rounds and mod doesn't, you've got pretty serious issues.
regards, tom lane
