Horton

Re: select to_number('1,000', '999,999');

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>
Cc: David Schweikert <dws@ee.ethz.ch>, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org, Karel Zak <zakkr@zf.jcu.cz>
Date: 2004-11-22T16:08:56Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs 
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com> writes:
> No, but I think you're supposed to use FM in such cases.
>
> select to_number(1000, 'FM999,999');

Good point --- I had forgot about FM.  In that case there *is* a bug
here, but I'm not sure if it's with to_char or to_number:

regression=# select to_number(to_char(1000, 'FM999,999'),'FM999,999');
 to_number
-----------
      1000
(1 row)

regression=# select to_number(to_char(1000, '999,999'),'999,999');
 to_number
-----------
       100
(1 row)

Whatever your opinion is about the behavior of the non-FM format, surely
to_char and to_number should be inverses.

			regards, tom lane