Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> * Using an integer is bogus. �Use a float4 and forget the weird scaling;
>> it should have exactly the same interpretation as stadistinct, except
>> for 0 meaning "unset" instead of "unknown".
> I have a deep-seated aversion to storing important values as float,
[ shrug... ] Precision is not important for this value: we are not
anywhere near needing more than six significant digits for our
statistical estimates. Range, on the other hand, could be important
when dealing with really large tables. So I'm much more concerned
about whether the definition is too restrictive than about whether
some uninformed person complains about exactness.
regards, tom lane