From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Wrong results from in_range() tests with infinite offset
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 20:59:57 -0400
Message-ID: <3506768.1594947597@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEZATCVXfxCR+2gCSwFMQPfyFUVNzY7U6oHfCfjD1OCCVfWUiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3393130.1594925893@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3464257.1594936216@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAEZATCVXfxCR+2gCSwFMQPfyFUVNzY7U6oHfCfjD1OCCVfWUiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2020, 22:50 Tom Lane, <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Actually, after staring at those results awhile longer, I decided
>> they were wrong. The results shown here seem actually sane ---
>> for instance, -Infinity shouldn't "infinitely precede" itself,
>> I think. (Maybe if you got solipsistic enough you could argue
>> that that is valid, but it seems pretty bogus.)
> Hmm, that code looks a bit fishy to me, but I really need to think about it
> some more. I'll take another look tomorrow, and maybe it'll become clearer.
It's certainly verbose, so I'd like to find a more concise way to
write the logic. But the v2 results seem right.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Wrong results from in_range() tests with infinite offset
In-Reply-To: <3506768.1594947597@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox