On 2020-Mar-18, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On 2020-Mar-18, Michael Paquier wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:07:37AM +0900, Atsushi Torikoshi wrote: > >>>> In this case, the parsing uses parse_real(), which is exactly the same > >>>> code path as what real GUCs use. > > > Hmm. So unadorned 'floating point' seems to refer to float8; you have > > to use float(24) in order to get a float4. The other standards-mandated > > name for float4 seems to be REAL. (I had a look around but was unable > > to figure out whether the standard mandates exact bit widths other than > > the precision spec). Since they're not doubles, what about we use REAL > > rather than FLOATING POINT? > > Isn't this whole argument based on a false premise? What parse_real > returns is double, not float. Also notice that config.sgml consistently > documents those GUCs as <type>floating point</type>. (I recall having > recently whacked some GUC descriptions that were randomly out of line > with that.)
Ah, I hadn't checked -- I was taking the function and struct names at face value, but it turns out that they're lies as well -- parse_real, relopt_real all parsing/storing doubles *is* confusing. That being the case, I agree that "float4" is the wrong thing and "floating point" is what to use. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
