Paul Tillotson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think anyone wants to defend the negative modulus as such, but to fix
> it, we have to do one of these:
> (1) Keep rounding division, but rewrite the numeric modulus operator to use a
> form of division that always rounds towards zero.
> or
> (2) Give up rounding division in favor of truncating towards zero.
or (3) increase the calculation precision (rscale), as suggested by
Alvaro's message.
Possibly that cannot work, but I haven't seen a proof.
> It looks like the "bug" can be easily fixed by changing the end of div_var
> where it says
> round_var(result, rscale);
> to
> trunc_var(result, scale);
I cannot believe that that won't create problems at least as bad as it
solves. Have you even tried the regression tests on this?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
