Avg error updating in progress Brunei asiafreechat

This can, if the maximum precision is, say, 5 significant digits, lead to a value of 123.000 to be returned from a UNION query as 10.000. The class Item_type_holder represents fields in the result tuple, and it is this class that has the final word in setting the number of significant digits prior to storing.

The maximum precision for getting non-approximate values is hardware specific. The obvious fix is of course to switch to non-fixed precision (using approximatations for all values with too many significant digits). However, at this point (The method Item_type_holder::join_types), all field metadata is gone.

The function causes quite a few unit tests to blow up and they had to b changed, but each one is annotated and motivated.

We frequently see the magical 53 and 24 give way to more relevant numbers. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version.

There are 4 parts to the problem: #1: DOUBLE and FLOAT fields don't display their proper display lengths in max_display_length().

But there is one more twist to the story: Division operations, / and AVG() increase the precision of the result according to the system variable div_prec_increment, so when the Item's that represent these operations fixate their precision, they must also increase their minimum field length. After review, it may be pushed to the relevant source trees for release in the next version.

You can access the patch from: Change [email protected], 2007-03-14 , [email protected] -0 Bug #24791: Union with AVG-groups generates wrong results The problem in this bug is when we create temporary tables.

When temporary tables are created for unions, there is some inferrence being carried out regarding the type of the column.

Whenever this column type is inferred to be REAL (i.e.

Leave a Reply