> On Oct 15, 2026, at 23:28, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Matthias van de Meent <[email protected]> writes:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2026 at 04:16, Chao Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> After thinking it over, I think we can add a check for base 1 in log_var(),
>>> and numeric_log() can just defer base 1 handling to log_var(). Please see
>>> v2, which implements this approach.
>
>> LGTM.
>
> Works for me too. Pushed after a bit of comment-smithing.
Thanks a lot for pushing.
>
> I did not back-patch as you suggested, though. This behavior for
> infinite input has been there for as long as we've had numeric
> infinity, so I think the argument for changing it in stable branches
> is pretty weak.
>
Understood. Thanks for the explanation.
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
