On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 09:20:09AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Mathematically, 1.0 = 0.9500... -> 1.05000...
>
> In theory, B-Tree could be fine with this. As long as the operators
> for =, <>, <, and > are made to consistently understand this principle.
> For example:
>
> 1.0 = 0.95
> 1.0 = 1.05
> 1.0 <> 0.94
> 1.0 <> 1.06
> 0.94 < 1.0
> 1.06 > 1.0
>
> I'm not sure that it warrants being changed, though. Storing mixed
> precision values in a column and expecting the database to understand
> rounding rules does not appeal to me. Too magical.
I take this back. It's magical enough to be impossible.
If 1.0 is inserted, and then 1.05, it could consider them 'equal' and
put them together. If 1.1 and 1.14 were inserted, they could be 'equal'
and put together. Then an insertion of '1' would have to re-group them
all together, making the B-Tree ineffective.
So - taking back what I say above.
Cheers,
mark
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
