On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 12:06:05AM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> Not yet, but thanks for the reminder. I will try to get this done on the
> weekend.
Seeing no updates, this has been switched to returned with feedback in
the CF app.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, 4 Nov 2021 at 08:08, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 26 Sep 2021, at 19:58, Isaac Morland wrote:
>
> > So I think I will prepare a revised patch that uses this formulation;
> and if I still have any suggestions that aren't directly related to adding
> abs(interval) I will split them off
> On 26 Sep 2021, at 19:58, Isaac Morland wrote:
> So I think I will prepare a revised patch that uses this formulation; and if
> I still have any suggestions that aren't directly related to adding
> abs(interval) I will split them off into a separate discussion.
This CF entry is marked Waitin
On Sun, 26 Sept 2021 at 13:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Isaac Morland writes:
> >> I've attached a patch for this. Turns out there was a comment in the
> source
> >> explaining that there is no interval_abs because it's not clear what to
> >> return; but I think it's clear that if i is an
I wrote:
> Isaac Morland writes:
>> I've attached a patch for this. Turns out there was a comment in the source
>> explaining that there is no interval_abs because it's not clear what to
>> return; but I think it's clear that if i is an interval the larger of i and
>> -i should be considered to be
Isaac Morland writes:
> I've attached a patch for this. Turns out there was a comment in the source
> explaining that there is no interval_abs because it's not clear what to
> return; but I think it's clear that if i is an interval the larger of i and
> -i should be considered to be the absolute v
I've attached a patch for this. Turns out there was a comment in the source
explaining that there is no interval_abs because it's not clear what to
return; but I think it's clear that if i is an interval the larger of i and
-i should be considered to be the absolute value, the same as would be done
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 07:15:19PM -0400, John Naylor wrote:
> Looking in the archives, I see this attempt that you can build upon:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAHE3wggpj%2Bk-zXLUdcBDRe3oahkb21pSMPDm-HzPjZxJn4vMMw%40mail.gmail.com
I see no problem with doing something more here.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:33 PM Isaac Morland
wrote:
>
> On a newly set up system there are 7 types with a unary minus operator
defined, but only 6 of them have an abs function:
>
...
> Would a patch to add a function with this behaviour to the initial
database be welcome?
Looking in the archives
On a newly set up system there are 7 types with a unary minus operator
defined, but only 6 of them have an abs function:
postgres=# \df abs
List of functions
Schema | Name | Result data type | Argument data types | Type
+--+--+-
10 matches
Mail list logo
