On 2/1/17 6:36 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: >> Got it, but if other people don't agree then this is going nowhere. > > Yes. As I wrote, I don't particularly care about functions like "is > point on line". I can prepare a patch to fix as many problems as > possible around those operators by preserving the current epsilon. > > I though we were arguing about *all* operators. Having containment > and placement operators consistent with each other, is the primary > thing I am trying to fix. Is removing epsilon from them is > acceptable? > > We can also stay away from changing operators like "~=" to minimise > compatibility break, if we keep the epsilon on some places. We can > instead document this operator as "close enough", and introduce > another symbol for really "the same" operator. > > That said, there are some places where it is hard to decide to apply > the epsilon or not. For example, we can keep the epsilon to check for > two lines being parallel, but then should we return the intersection > point, or not? Those issues may become more clear when I start > working on it, if preserving epsilon for those operators is the way to > go forward.
The current patches do not apply cleanly at cccbdde: $ git apply ../other/0001-float-header-v03.patch error: patch failed: contrib/btree_gist/btree_ts.c:1 error: contrib/btree_gist/btree_ts.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_fdw.c:26 error: contrib/postgres_fdw/postgres_fdw.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/backend/access/gist/gistutil.c:14 error: src/backend/access/gist/gistutil.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/backend/utils/adt/float.c:339 error: src/backend/utils/adt/float.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/backend/utils/adt/geo_ops.c:14 error: src/backend/utils/adt/geo_ops.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c:68 error: src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c: patch does not apply error: patch failed: src/include/utils/builtins.h:334 error: src/include/utils/builtins.h: patch does not apply I don't believe this patch should be in the "Needs review" state anyway. There are clearly a number of issues that need work and agreement. Given that this thread has been idle since the beginning of February and no resolution is likely for v10, I'm marking this submission "Returned with Feedback". -- -David da...@pgmasters.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers