Thom Brown escribió:
> On 26 February 2010 14:33, Raymond O'Donnell <rod@iol.ie> wrote:
> > On 26/02/2010 12:15, Thom Brown wrote:
> >> On 26 February 2010 12:02, Anton Maksimenkov <anton200@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm also curious to know why there's an underflow error instead of
> overflow. And in fact, even if a 19 digit phone number were passed
> in, it would only result in a 10^-1 calculation, resulting in 0.1.
>
> I think we need to know what value is being passed in to generate this error.
If you pass a string longer than 342 chars it fails with an underflow.
Not sure why it doesn't fail the second time, sounds fishy.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.