Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
>>> Interestingly, I get different results (on both 9.1.4 and 9.3.0) on
>>> Windows:
>> I'm not particularly surprised that Windows is not being IEEE compliant, and
>> instead chooses the more common round-away-from-zero behavior, here though I
>> am unsure where the depen
On 04/15/2014 10:21 AM, Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
On 15/04/2014 17:34, David G Johnston wrote:
Oh, so does the rounding code use OS facilities, then, rather than being
implemented in Postgres? - Didn't know that, though I was aware PG does
that in other areas (collation, for example).
See th
On 15/04/2014 17:34, David G Johnston wrote:
> Raymond O'Donnell wrote
>> On 15/04/2014 17:20, David G Johnston wrote:
>>> Willy-Bas Loos-3 wrote
Hi, I ran into some strange behavior. Seems like a bug to me?
wbloos=# select round(0.5::numeric), round(0.5::double precision);
rou
Raymond O'Donnell wrote
> On 15/04/2014 17:20, David G Johnston wrote:
>> Willy-Bas Loos-3 wrote
>>> Hi, I ran into some strange behavior. Seems like a bug to me?
>>>
>>> wbloos=# select round(0.5::numeric), round(0.5::double precision);
>>> round | round ---+--- 1 | 0 (1 row)
>>
>>
On 15/04/2014 17:20, David G Johnston wrote:
> Willy-Bas Loos-3 wrote
>> Hi, I ran into some strange behavior. Seems like a bug to me?
>>
>> wbloos=# select round(0.5::numeric), round(0.5::double precision);
>> round | round ---+--- 1 | 0 (1 row)
>
> Not a bug; and likely to simple t
Willy-Bas Loos-3 wrote
> Hi,
> I ran into some strange behavior.
> Seems like a bug to me?
>
> wbloos=# select round(0.5::numeric), round(0.5::double precision);
> round | round
> ---+---
> 1 | 0
> (1 row)
Not a bug; and likely to simple to have escaped notice this long so the
f
Hi,
I ran into some strange behavior.
Seems like a bug to me?
wbloos=# select round(0.5::numeric), round(0.5::double precision);
round | round
---+---
1 | 0
(1 row)
wbloos=# select version();
version
--
