On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 16:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think this is what Andrus is seeing:
>
> > test=> CREATE TABLE foo (n numeric(9,3));
> > CREATE TABLE
> > test=> INSERT INTO foo VALUES (100);
> > ERROR: numeric field overflow
> > DETAIL: The absol
Michael Fuhr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think this is what Andrus is seeing:
> test=> CREATE TABLE foo (n numeric(9,3));
> CREATE TABLE
> test=> INSERT INTO foo VALUES (100);
> ERROR: numeric field overflow
> DETAIL: The absolute value is greater than or equal to 10^6 for field with
>
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 04:09:23PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Andrus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Why Postgres 8.1.1 in XP returns different exponents ( 10^6, 10^9, 10^7)
> > for
> > field with precision 9, scale 3 ?
>
> Could we see a complete test case --- ie, what are the input values
> ca
"Andrus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why Postgres 8.1.1 in XP returns different exponents ( 10^6, 10^9, 10^7) for
> field with precision 9, scale 3 ?
Could we see a complete test case --- ie, what are the input values
causing these messages?
regards, tom lane
-
I have NUMERIC(9,3) field.
Postgres produces different (!) error messages when inserted value is too
big to fit into this field
ERROR: numeric field overflow
DETAIL: The absolute value is greater than or equal to 10^6 for field with
precision 9, scale 3.;
DETAIL: The absolute value is great
