Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from
 <pgsql-docs-owner+M8646=pgsql+2Ddocs=arkaria.postgresql.org@postgresql.org>)
	id 1bANLL-0002Zf-TC
	for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 20:11:20 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from
 <pgsql-docs-owner+M8646=pgsql+2Ddocs=arkaria.postgresql.org@postgresql.org>)
	id 1bANLL-0002o6-Cb
	for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 20:11:19 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1bANLK-0002nU-CE
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 20:11:18 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1bANLH-0004t5-AN
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 20:11:17 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u57KBDMY025462;
	Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:11:14 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=bcrgen_Purtz?= <juergen@purtz.de>
cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Math function description issue
In-reply-to: <5756784D.3040602@purtz.de>
References: <20160606054056.1385.38085@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <CAB7nPqSiJwS_YTyy_v5ZDKV-ywGs5wV9YrXwT=uOp1hMS-oY=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <9158.1465268785@sss.pgh.pa.us> <5756784D.3040602@purtz.de>
Comments: In-reply-to =?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=bcrgen_Purtz?= <juergen@purtz.de>
	message dated "Tue, 07 Jun 2016 09:31:25 +0200"
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 16:11:13 -0400
Message-ID: <25461.1465330273@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs>
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>
List-ID: <pgsql-docs.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-docs>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>
X-Mailing-List: pgsql-docs
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

=?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=bcrgen_Purtz?= <juergen@purtz.de> writes:
> The standard says:
> "<ceiling function> computes the least integer greater than or equal to 
> its argument."

Hmm, you're looking at the SQL standard I guess.  The existing wording
in our docs seems to be taken from the C/POSIX standard, which says
"[ceil(x)] shall compute the smallest integral value not less than x".

> a) In my opinion this wording is easier to understand because it avoids 
> the negation via "not less".

That's a fair point.

The other difference is least/greatest versus smallest/largest.  I'm not
sure if using least/greatest would help the people who misunderstand
"smallest" as "closest to zero".  They might; but being less-common words,
they might also confuse people whose native language isn't English.
Anyone have an opinion about which to use?

> b) To dispel the ambiguities concerning what is greater or lesser (with 
> negative numbers) we may add a second example with +42.8 and an 
> additional comment - something like: "Please consider the situation with 
> negative numbers: -42 is greater than -43".

I'm not terribly excited about that, and even if I were, there doesn't
seem to be a good way to shoehorn multiple examples into one entry in
these tables.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs