Horton

Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow"

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

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh@ys.jp.nec.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Akio Iwaasa <aki-iwaasa@vt.jp.nec.com>
Date: 2018-05-02T14:42:27Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers 
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> That's probably true, but making dev, test, and production boxes
>> similar is generally good practice and users can do as much or as
>> little of it as they find they need in order to avoid getting burned.
>> They can't do anything about behavior changes we inject into minor
>> releases.

> ​+1; this doesn't seem clear-cut and important enough to deviate from the
> (for me) preferable position of leaving well-enough-alone in the back
> branches.

Well, I seem to be in the minority here, so unless additional people
chime in, I'll revert this in the back branches shortly.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Revert back-branch changes in power()'s behavior for NaN inputs.

  2. Avoid wrong results for power() with NaN input on more platforms.

  3. Avoid wrong results for power() with NaN input on some platforms.