Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:22:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> We could alternatively set extra_float_digits to its max value and hope >> that off-by-one-in-the-last-place values would get printed as something >> visibly different from the exact result. I'm not sure I want to trust >> that that works reliably; but maybe it would be worth printing the >> result both ways, just to provide additional info when there's a failure.
> We'd have an independent problem if extra_float_digits=3 prints the same > digits for distinguishable float values, so I wouldn't mind relying on it not > to do that. But can we expect the extra_float_digits=3 representation of > those particular values to be the same for every implementation? Hm? The expected answer is exact (30, 45, or whatever) in each case. If we get some residual low-order digits then it's a failure, so we don't need to worry about whether it's the same failure everywhere. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers