Re: Decimal64 and Decimal128 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: Decimal64 and Decimal128
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRDaLwwnv3sTnz=prD5QBAqf9LpWJcg-EmNv72FE1CL+MA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Decimal64 and Decimal128  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Decimal64 and Decimal128  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


2015-09-25 0:25 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>:
On 9/24/15 3:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
I would worry about the implicit casts you've added. They might cause problems.

Given the cycle created between numeric->decimal and decimal->numeric, I can pretty much guarantee they will. In any case, I don't think implicit casting from numeric->decimal is a good idea since it can overflow. I'm not sure that the other direction is safe either... I can't remember offhand if casting correctly obeys typmod or not.

BTW, have you talked to Pavel about making these changes to his code? Seems a shame to needlessly fork it. :/

yes, he talked with me, and I gave a agreement to continue/enhance/fork this project how will be necessary

Regards

Pavel
 
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Seq Scan
Next
From: Jeevan Chalke
Date:
Subject: Re: TEXT vs VARCHAR join qual push down diffrence, bug or expected?