I agree, the current numbers are misleading, nothing other than null really makes sense, at least the consumers of it can decide what to do if they need to rather than check for some strange number, sounds good to me.
> > After more thought I like returning NULL for both precision and scale in > the case of unconstrained numeric columns. Any other value is > arbitrary. In particular, the 1000 cited in the docs is *very* > arbitrary, and I don't think it actually constrains what you can store, > only what you can declare as a column precision. [tries it...] Yup, > I can store "power(10.0, 10000)" in an unconstrained numeric column. > It seems to fail around 10^140000 but I'm not sure where that limit > is coming from exactly... > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
