On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Doing some more testing of the numeric code patched in [1] I noticed
> another case where the result is inaccurate -- computing 0.12 ^
> -2345.6 gives a very large number containing 2162 digits, but only the
> first 2006 correct, while the last 156 digits are wrong.

## Advertising

Just out of curiosity, how can you tell? Where do you get alternate
output to compare against?
Also, I wonder what we think the contract with the user is in cases
like this. Surely, if we were dealing with floating point numbers,
nobody would expect a calculation like this to be accurate beyond the
first n digits, where n is surely much less than 2006. I like the
fact that numeric has a lot more precision than any built-in floating
point type, but does it have to get every digit in front of the
decimal point exactly right no matter how many there are?
rhaas=# select tan(pi()::numeric/2), tan(pi()/2);
tan | tan
-----------------+----------------------
618986325617924 | 1.63312393531954e+16
(1 row)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers