Tom Lane wrote:
The original INT64 coding here is exact (at least for the common case where fval is zero) but I'm not convinced that your revision can't suffer from roundoff error.
Good point. I'll study this tonight; and either try to make a patch that'll be exact where fval's zero or try to come up with convincing reasons that it's harmless. Once this settles I suppose I should post a ECPG patch that's based off of these Decode/Encode interval functions too? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
