On Jan 4, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
Maybe we have a difference in semantics that is dependent upon
the application.
The distinction can be important, as SQL has only partially
implemented 3-valued logic (TRUE/FALSE/UNKNOWN) and treats NULL in
sometimes unexpected ways. NaN co
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
It's not unknown: it's known to be something other than a number, which is
not the same as unknown.
Michael,
Perhaps I mis-interpreted the original message. If a measurement is out of
the instrument's range it means that the value is unknown. Fo
On Jan 4, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Rich Shepard wrote:
It would be appropriate to convert NaN to NULL since the valid is
literally unknown.
It's not unknown: it's known to be something other than a number,
which is not the same as unknown.
*considers quoting Rumsfield, but common sense prevails
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007, thereverandpdawg wrote:
I have some field data which comes off of a data logger. In some cases
the data is out of bounds of logger or instrumentation. In which case
it is reported as 'NaN' for 'not a number.'
Is there such a value in postgresql? If not I will have to hack i
On Fri, Dec 28, 2007 at 10:22:03AM -0800, thereverandpdawg wrote:
> I have some field data which comes off of a data logger. In some cases
> the data is out of bounds of logger or instrumentation. In which case
> it is reported as 'NaN' for 'not a number.'
>
> Is there such a value in postgresql?
I am new to this group so forgive me if this is the wrong area to post
in.
I have some field data which comes off of a data logger. In some cases
the data is out of bounds of logger or instrumentation. In which case
it is reported as 'NaN' for 'not a number.'
Is there such a value in postgresql?
