Thread

  1. BUG #19101: Ceil on BIGINT could lost precision in decil function

    PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> — 2025-11-02T15:16:09Z

    The following bug has been logged on the website:
    
    Bug reference:      19101
    Logged by:          Jason Smith
    Email address:      dqetool@126.com
    PostgreSQL version: 18.0
    Operating system:   Ubuntu 22.04
    Description:        
    
    I try to store a large number in `BIGINT` and run  `ceil(c1)` command.
    However, the result lost some precision due to calling `decil` function.
    ```sql
    CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 BIGINT);
    INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4854233034440979799);
    -- dceil
    SELECT ceil(c1) FROM t1; -- {4.854233034440979e+18}
    ```
    The original number is expected to return. In this case, calling
    numeric_ceil function may be proper, and I try the following case.
    ```sql
    CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 DECIMAL(20,0));
    INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4854233034440979799);
    -- numeric_ceil
    SELECT ceil(c1) FROM t1; -- {4854233034440979799}
    ```
    
    
  2. Re: BUG #19101: Ceil on BIGINT could lost precision in decil function

    Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> — 2025-11-02T16:31:29Z

    On Sun, 2025-11-02 at 15:16 +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
    > PostgreSQL version: 18.0
    > 
    > I try to store a large number in `BIGINT` and run  `ceil(c1)` command.
    > However, the result lost some precision due to calling `decil` function.
    > ```sql
    > CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 BIGINT);
    > INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4854233034440979799);
    > -- dceil
    > SELECT ceil(c1) FROM t1; -- {4.854233034440979e+18}
    > ```
    > The original number is expected to return.
    
    This is not a bug.  There are two ceil() functions:
    
                             List of functions
       Schema   │ Name │ Result data type │ Argument data types │ Type 
    ════════════╪══════╪══════════════════╪═════════════════════╪══════
     pg_catalog │ ceil │ double precision │ double precision    │ func
     pg_catalog │ ceil │ numeric          │ numeric             │ func
    
    There are implicit casts from "bigint" to both "numeric" and "double precision":
    
                             List of casts
       Source type    │   Target type    │ Function │   Implicit?   
    ══════════════════╪══════════════════╪══════════╪═══════════════
     ...
     bigint           │ double precision │ float8   │ yes
     ...
     bigint           │ numeric          │ numeric  │ yes
    
    There are two preferred numeric data types, and "numeric" is none of them:
    
    SELECT typname FROM pg_type WHERE typcategory = 'N' AND typispreferred;
    
     typname 
    ═════════
     oid
     float8   (which is the same as "double precision")
    
    Consequently, rule 4 d of the type conversion rules for function calls
    (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/typeconv-func.html)
    decrees that the "bigint" be case to "double precision", which explains
    the rounding errors.
    
    Use an explicit type cast:
    
      SELECT ceil(c1::numeric) FROM t1;
    
    Yours,
    Laurenz Albe
    
  3. Re: BUG #19101: Ceil on BIGINT could lost precision in decil function

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2025-11-02T16:35:26Z

    PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
    > I try to store a large number in `BIGINT` and run  `ceil(c1)` command.
    > However, the result lost some precision due to calling `decil` function.
    > ```sql
    > CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 BIGINT);
    > INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4854233034440979799);
    > -- dceil
    > SELECT ceil(c1) FROM t1; -- {4.854233034440979e+18}
    > ```
    
    This is not a bug.  There are two versions of ceil() and you're
    invoking the wrong one.  You'd need to explicitly cast the
    argument to numeric if you want ceil(numeric) to be used.
    
    In this context it's a bit unfortunate that the parser's type
    preference rules [1] prefer float8 to numeric.  But we're pretty
    much stuck with that behavior because (a) the SQL standard
    says so [2], and (b) even if it didn't, we have a couple of
    decades of history to be backwards compatible with.
    
    			regards, tom lane
    
    [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/typeconv.html
    
    [2] Well, what it really says is that expressions that mix
    exact and inexact numeric types produce inexact results.
    We interpret that as meaning that float8 is the preferred
    type in the numeric category, so it wins ambiguous cases.
    
    
    
    
  4. Re:Re: BUG #19101: Ceil on BIGINT could lost precision in decil function

    dqetool <dqetool@126.com> — 2025-11-03T02:48:34Z

    Thanks for the quick response. I try to add an explicit type conversion to avoid this problem.
    At 2025-11-03 00:35:26, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
    >PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> writes:
    >> I try to store a large number in `BIGINT` and run  `ceil(c1)` command.
    >> However, the result lost some precision due to calling `decil` function.
    >> ```sql
    >> CREATE TABLE t1 (c1 BIGINT);
    >> INSERT INTO t1 VALUES (4854233034440979799);
    >> -- dceil
    >> SELECT ceil(c1) FROM t1; -- {4.854233034440979e+18}
    >> ```
    >
    >This is not a bug.  There are two versions of ceil() and you're
    >invoking the wrong one.  You'd need to explicitly cast the
    >argument to numeric if you want ceil(numeric) to be used.
    >
    >In this context it's a bit unfortunate that the parser's type
    >preference rules [1] prefer float8 to numeric.  But we're pretty
    >much stuck with that behavior because (a) the SQL standard
    >says so [2], and (b) even if it didn't, we have a couple of
    >decades of history to be backwards compatible with.
    >
    >			regards, tom lane
    >
    >[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/typeconv.html
    >
    >[2] Well, what it really says is that expressions that mix
    >exact and inexact numeric types produce inexact results.
    >We interpret that as meaning that float8 is the preferred
    >type in the numeric category, so it wins ambiguous cases.