No patch doesn't do that in reverse. You may read my comments on jira. I think we should leave this patch in and do a follow-up jira for the change I suggested in previous email (and in jira comments).
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <ser...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > Doesn’t the patch in question do the reverse? I think we can have a > follow-up JIRA if it’s not already done in all circumstances, without the > patch. > > On 16/6/14, 16:13, "Ashutosh Chauhan" <ashutosh.chau...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >What about my suggestions to treat non-integral constant literals as > >BigDecimal instead of Double? I checked on other products and thats what > >MySQL, Oracle & SQL server is doing. > > > >Thanks, > >Ashutosh > > > >On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Alan Gates <alanfga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I’m +1 on reverting it. Let’s not change around functionality on our > >> users and let’s stay as close as possible to the standard, both of which > >> reverting this seems to do. > >> > >> Alan. > >> > >> > On Jun 10, 2016, at 16:07, Sergey Shelukhin <ser...@hortonworks.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > There has recently been a change in behavior in Hive wrt doubles and > >> > decimals, HIVE-13380; where the literals were changed to be double by > >> > default, resulting in some unexpected behavior when comparing decimal > >> > columns with arithmetic expressions on literals. > >> > Right now it has been reverted from 2.1, it’s still there on master > >>until > >> > we decide what to do. > >> > > >> > According to SQL92 (I don’t have access to a later one), section 5.3 > >> > <exact numeric literal> ::= <unsigned integer> [ <period> [ <unsigned > >> > integer> ] ] | <period> <unsigned integer> > >> > ... > >> > 13)The data type of an <exact numeric literal> is exact numeric. > >> > > >> > From previous comments there, exact-numeric would basically be > >>decimal in > >> > this case. > >> > > >> > Approximate (basically, float/double in this case) literal is defined > >>as > >> > <approximate numeric literal> ::= <mantissa> E <exponent> > >> > > >> > Then, in 6.12, the expression (at least the arithmetic) on two exacts > >> > needs to have the exact results; if either side is approximate, the > >> result > >> > is approximate. > >> > > >> > However, some RDBMS-es apparently prefer double over decimal. > >> > > >> > I think we should go according to SQL92, revert the patch also from > >> > master, and also potentially investigate ANSI SQL compatibility for > >> > existing type resolution in other places. > >> > Opinions, suggestions, comments? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >
