Re: Document if width_bucket's low and high are inclusive/exclusive

Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 at 18:09, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Clearly these functions must reject NaN histogram bounds, for
>> the same reason they reject infinite bounds.  But I don't see
>> any reason why they couldn't treat a NaN operand as valid.
>> Should we change them?  (I imagine this'd be a HEAD-only
>> change, and probably v19 material at this point.)

> Yes, I think that's a good idea (for v19 I would have thought).
> Allowing the operand to be NaN definitely seems preferable to throwing
> an error, since the operand might well come from data in a table
> containing NaNs.

I started a new thread for that, since it's no longer docs material:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2822872.1750540911%40sss.pgh.pa.us

			regards, tom lane