Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.20.1712212235350.7724@lancre обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench (Raúl Marín Rodríguez <rmrodriguez@carto.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] pow support for pgbench
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Raúl, >> v7 needs a rebase. >> >> Also, you might try to produce a version which is compatible with Robert's >> constraints. My 0.02€ on this new version: Applies cleanly, compiles and works. I cannot say that I like it more than the previous version. If a double is always returned, I'm wondering whether keeping the ipow version makes much sense: In case of double loss of precision, the precision is lost, too bad, and casting back to int won't bring it back. In the doc, I'm not sure that "Numeric" brings anything. "Exponentiation" would be enough. Also, in pg I just noticed that POW is a shorthand for POWER. Maybe both should be supported? Or not. -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: