Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow() - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dean Rasheed
Subject Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()
Date
Msg-id CAEZATCWZjNSbg89pF-5T11nyL5=foaGJ8Ma256tX9ZiX6dtn5A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 10 December 2015 at 20:02, Tom Lane wrote: >> It seems to be a loss of 4 digits in every case I've seen. > > I wouldn't have a problem with, say, throwing in an extra DEC_DIGITS worth > of rscale in each of these functions so that the discrepancies tend to > favor more significant digits out, rather than fewer. I don't know that > it's worth trying to guarantee that the result is never fewer digits than > before, and I certainly wouldn't want to make the rules a lot more complex > than what's there now. But perhaps we could cover most cases easily. > > Dean, do you want to recheck the patch with an eye to that? > OK, I'll take a look at it. Regards, Dean
This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Error with index on unlogged table
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Error with index on unlogged table