pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

Started by Bruce Momjianabout 15 years ago6 messagescomitters
Jump to latest
#1Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us

Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range.

Branch
------
master

Details
-------
http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/0cdbef6cec753a1606c2ce2955e3ff1005ed5ebf

Modified Files
--------------
doc/src/sgml/datatype.sgml | 5 +++--
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

#2Robert Haas
robertmhaas@gmail.com
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#1)
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range.

This is entirely redundant. You've added "(when the precision is not
specified)" but that's exactly what the word "otherwise" already
conveys.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

#3Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Robert Haas (#2)
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

Robert Haas wrote:

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range.

This is entirely redundant. You've added "(when the precision is not
specified)" but that's exactly what the word "otherwise" already
conveys.

Right, but the old wording was:

otherwise the current implementation of the <type>NUMERIC</type>
is subject to the limits described in <xref
linkend="datatype-numeric-table">.

I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you
could just specify NUMERIC alone. We know you can you can do things
like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to
explicity mention it. Other wording?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

#4Robert Haas
robertmhaas@gmail.com
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#3)
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

Robert Haas wrote:

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high range.

This is entirely redundant.  You've added "(when the precision is not
specified)" but that's exactly what the word "otherwise" already
conveys.

Right, but the old wording was:

     otherwise the current implementation of the <type>NUMERIC</type>
     is subject to the limits described in <xref
     linkend="datatype-numeric-table">.

I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you
could just specify NUMERIC alone.  We know you can you can do things
like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to
explicity mention it.  Other wording?

Oh, good catch. I agree that removing the extra "the" is a good
change, but I think you should remove the parenthetical phrase you
added.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

#5Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
In reply to: Robert Haas (#4)
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you
could just specify NUMERIC alone. �We know you can you can do things
like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to
explicity mention it. �Other wording?

Oh, good catch. I agree that removing the extra "the" is a good
change, but I think you should remove the parenthetical phrase you
added.

I agree, the parenthetical phrase is entirely redundant with the earlier
part of the sentence; or if you must have it, it belongs after
"otherwise", not where it is.

Also, could we spell "explicitly" correctly?

regards, tom lane

#6Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Tom Lane (#5)
Re: pgsql: Clarify that a non-specified precision NUMERIC has a very high r

Tom Lane wrote:

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

I removed the extra "the", and I didn't think people were clear you
could just specify NUMERIC alone. ���We know you can you can do things
like VARCHAR, but others will probably not realize it so I wanted to
explicity mention it. ���Other wording?

Oh, good catch. I agree that removing the extra "the" is a good
change, but I think you should remove the parenthetical phrase you
added.

I agree, the parenthetical phrase is entirely redundant with the earlier
part of the sentence; or if you must have it, it belongs after
"otherwise", not where it is.

Also, could we spell "explicitly" correctly?

OK, spelling fixed, and paragraph paired down:

The maximum allowed precision when explicitly specified in the
type declaration is 1000; <type>NUMERIC</type> with no specified
precision is subject to the limits described in <xref
linkend="datatype-numeric-table">.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +