Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dean Rasheed
Тема Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()
Дата
Msg-id CAEZATCU5hidbidw2rh8i1fPQC8VU4OGAQfeVLjR1KmO-5Lan3g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 13 November 2015 at 21:00, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> BTW, something I find confusing and error-prone is that this patch keeps
> on using the term "weight" to refer to numbers expressed in decimal digits
> (ie, the approximate log10 of something).  Basically everywhere in the
> existing code, "weights" are measured in base-NBASE digits, while "scales"
> are measured in decimal digits.  I've not yet come across anyplace where
> you got the units wrong, but it seems like a gotcha waiting to bite the
> next hacker.
>
> I thought for a bit about s/weight/scale/g in the patch, but that is not
> le mot juste either, since weight is generally counting digits to the left
> of the decimal point while scale is generally counting digits to the
> right.
>
> The best idea that has come to me is to use "dweight" to refer to a weight
> measured in decimal digits.  Anyone have a better thought?
>

Yeah, dweight works for me.

Regards,
Dean



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Dean Rasheed
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Inaccurate results from numeric ln(), log(), exp() and pow()
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [DESIGN] ParallelAppend