Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics

2006-07-30 Thread Sergey E. Koposov
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ... From a mathematician's point of view, however, some of these functions normally produce irrational numbers anyway, so it seems unlikely that numeric will be useful. But looking at the definition of, say, regr

Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics

2006-07-29 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... From a mathematician's point of view, however, some of these > functions normally produce irrational numbers anyway, so it seems > unlikely that numeric will be useful. But looking at the definition > of, say, regr_avgx(Y, X), if all the input

Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics

2006-07-29 Thread Sergey E. Koposov
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Sergey E. Koposov wrote: I think since we are supporting the numeric type as a special high-precision type, Postgres must have the high-precision versions of all computational functions. Just my opinion. Another way to look at it is whether you wan

Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics

2006-07-29 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Sergey E. Koposov wrote: > I think since we are supporting the numeric type as a special > high-precision type, Postgres must have the high-precision > versions of all computational functions. Just my opinion. Another way to look at it is whether you want to have accurate computations (numeric) o

Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics

2006-07-29 Thread Sergey E. Koposov
Tom, thank you for the reviewing/correcting/applying my patches... On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Tom Lane wrote: I wrote: There is room to argue that the numeric-arithmetic version would be worth having on the grounds of greater precision or range, but it's a big chunk of code and the public demand fo

Re: [HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics aggregates?

2006-07-28 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > There is room to argue that the numeric-arithmetic version would be > worth having on the grounds of greater precision or range, but it's a > big chunk of code and the public demand for the functionality has not > exactly been overwhelming. > Comments? Since no one's even bothered to r

[HACKERS] Do we need multiple forms of the SQL2003 statistics aggregates?

2006-07-27 Thread Tom Lane
Sergey's recent patch for the SQL2003 binary aggregates implements each of them three times: in float4, float8, and numeric arithmetic. This seems like vast overkill. The float4 versions certainly ought to go, as they won't perform noticeably better than float8 and will likely be subject to terri