[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-bugs
Subject:    [BUGS] Re: BUG #12053: Strange behavior for numeric types with unspecified precision-scale
From:       David G Johnston <david.g.johnston () gmail ! com>
Date:       2014-11-29 17:40:33
Message-ID: 1417282833963-5828655.post () n5 ! nabble ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Tom Lane-2 wrote
> Tommaso Sala &lt;

> tommaso.sala@

> &gt; writes:
> > The strange fact is that if you try to write 0.000001, it gets displayed
> > correctly
> 
> My guess is that the adapter miscomputes dscale in only some situations.
> 
> > I'd agree with your proposed solution, if I only set a dscale of 2.
> > But I didn't.
> 
> You didn't, but the available evidence says that Devart's adapter did.
> 
> If you maintain there is some other bug involved, maybe I *should* make
> numeric_recv throw an error, just so the blame gets placed clearly.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane

Would there be value in back-patching the truncation option but making it
fail in 9.5?

I assume this is somehow a different situation than that where someone does,
for instance, (1.0/3.0)::numeric(5,2) or '1.0001':numeric(3,2)...neither of
these should fail.

David J.





--
View this message in context: \
http://postgresql.nabble.com/BUG-12053-Strange-behavior-for-numeric-types-with-unspecified-precision-scale-tp5828340p5828655.html
 Sent from the PostgreSQL - bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]