FAQ

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Prevent problems by clamping negative penalty values to
zero.  (Just to be really sure, I also made it force NaNs to zero.)
Do gistchoose et al expect the triangle function to obey the triangle
inequality? If so isn't it possible treating NaNs as zero would fail
that? I'm not sure there's any safe assumption for NaN

--
greg

## Search Discussions

•  at May 31, 2011 at 11:12 pm ⇧

Greg Stark writes:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Prevent problems by clamping negative penalty values to
zero.  (Just to be really sure, I also made it force NaNs to zero.)
Do gistchoose et al expect the triangle function to obey the triangle
inequality?
Don't think so.
If so isn't it possible treating NaNs as zero would fail
that? I'm not sure there's any safe assumption for NaN
Well, leaving it as NaN is almost certain to not work desirably.

regards, tom lane
•  at May 31, 2011 at 11:58 pm ⇧

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Do gistchoose et al expect the triangle function to obey the triangle
inequality?
Don't think so.
I guess it was obvious but that was "expect the *penalty* function to
obey the triangle inequality"

--
greg
•  at Jun 1, 2011 at 7:20 am ⇧

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Greg Stark wrote:

I guess it was obvious but that was "expect the *penalty* function to
obey the triangle inequality"
Actually, penalty function for boxes is even not commutative. Fox example:
A = ((0,0)-(1,1))
B = ((0,0)-(2,2))

penalty(A,B) = 3
penalty(B,A) = 0

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.

## Related Discussions

Discussion Overview
 group pgsql-hackers categories postgresql posted May 31, '11 at 11:08p active Jun 1, '11 at 7:20a posts 4 users 3 website postgresql.org... irc #postgresql

### 3 users in discussion

Content

People

Support

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase