vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||
| The following bug has been logged online: Bug reference: 2467 Logged by: Rae Stiening Email address: stiening@stiening.com PostgreSQL version: 8.1.4 Operating system: Linux Description: Documentation Details: Table 9-3. Mathematical Functions Description of the "width_bucket(...)" "return the bucket to which operand would be assigned in an equidepth histogram with count buckets, an upper bound of b1, and a lower bound of b2" I believe that the lower bound is b1 and upper b2. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend |
| ||||
| "Rae Stiening" <stiening@stiening.com> writes: > Description of the "width_bucket(...)" > "return the bucket to which operand would be assigned in an equidepth > histogram with count buckets, an upper bound of b1, and a lower bound of > b2" > I believe that the lower bound is b1 and upper b2. I agree that this is a typo, but looking at the spec and the function code, the description seems misleading altogether. Apparently b1 > b2 is allowed and the computation is effectively negated then (the buckets are numbered in descending rather than ascending order). So ISTM that just switching "lower" and "upper" in the text doesn't really get us to the point of adequately documenting the function. But the description is already too long to fit comfortably in the table, so adding another sentence to cover the b1 > b2 case isn't attractive. Any ideas what to do? Would "starting bound" and "ending bound" work, or just confuse people more? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster |