> On 13/10/2022 19:16 CEST Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Erik Wienhold writes:
> > On 13/10/2022 18:20 CEST Adrian Klaver wrote:
> >> select power(10, -18::numeric);
> >> power
> >>
> >> 0.
> >>
> >> Why is the cast throwing off the result?
>
> > Calling power(numer
Dean Rasheed writes:
> The most obvious thing to do is to try to make power_var_int() choose
> the same result rscale as power_var() so that the results are
> consistent regardless of whether the exponent is an integer.
Yeah, I think we should try to end up with that.
> It's worth noting, howeve
On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 at 18:17, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm inclined to think that we should push the responsibility for choosing
> its rscale into power_var_int(), because internally that already does
> estimate the result weight, so with a little code re-ordering we won't
> need duplicative estimates.
Erik Wienhold writes:
> On 13/10/2022 18:20 CEST Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> select power(10, -18::numeric);
>> power
>>
>> 0.
>>
>> Why is the cast throwing off the result?
> Calling power(numeric, numeric) is what I expect in that case instead of
> downcasting
On 2022-10-13 09:20:51 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> In trying to answer an SO question I ran across this:
>
> Postgres version 14.5
>
Same for 11.17. So it's been like that for some time, maybe forever.
> select power(10, -18);
> power
> ---
> 1e-18
> (1 row)
>
> select power(10, -18::n
> On 13/10/2022 18:20 CEST Adrian Klaver wrote:
>
> In trying to answer an SO question I ran across this:
>
> Postgres version 14.5
>
> select 10^(-1 * 18);
> ?column?
> --
> 1e-18
>
> select 10^(-1 * 18::numeric);
>?column?
>
> 0.
In trying to answer an SO question I ran across this:
Postgres version 14.5
select 10^(-1 * 18);
?column?
--
1e-18
select 10^(-1 * 18::numeric);
?column?
0.
Same for power:
select power(10, -18);
power
---
1e-18
(1 row)
select p
