Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-docs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1uT5hZ-00HIg0-3i
	for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2025 21:24:41 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-docs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1uT5hX-009PNr-5u
	for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2025 21:24:39 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1uT5hW-009PNj-UP
	for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 21 Jun 2025 21:24:39 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1uT5hV-003HqP-2w
	for pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org;
	Sat, 21 Jun 2025 21:24:38 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 55LLOZHA2823089;
	Sat, 21 Jun 2025 17:24:35 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
cc: Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>,
        Ben Peachey Higdon <bpeacheyhigdon@gmail.com>,
        pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Document if width_bucket's low and high are inclusive/exclusive
In-reply-to: 
 <CAEZATCXxqt=kYeQpy0hpv9H=Tboa0GW3yj-x856UE-O=w0Kr9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2BD74F86-5B89-4AC1-8F13-23CED3546AC1@gmail.com>
 <CABV9wwPh9+JAYBudAhTY8yPj5VJACA_FpHfEAaHMX1s4z05VkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1167135.1750277532@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAJSLCQ2aNwXntHfFZdLnrAqrhPUbm7YqytobFOid5mX3VU-C5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <1391433.1750345913@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2525554.1750454361@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAEZATCUnTYEi5QEFtRkaNvMYHfanKbwJir1E9Q8qYzaLt_0ktQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <2732038.1750525788@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAEZATCXxqt=kYeQpy0hpv9H=Tboa0GW3yj-x856UE-O=w0Kr9w@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sat, 21 Jun 2025 21:26:13 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2823087.1750541075.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 17:24:35 -0400
Message-ID: <2823088.1750541075@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-docs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-docs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-docs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2823088.1750541075%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

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