Created attachment 135786 [details]
Small database with high-precision data
In Base, copying a table or query with standard "Copy", the data are only copied to the precision defined by the formatting, not the full precision. For instance, standard numeric format shows two decimal places, so a data entry containing the number 3.1415 will be copied as 3.14, resulting in loss of precision.
For seeing the behaviour, open the attached small database and copy "Table1" into e.g. a Calc spreadsheet. The database contains the data
01-01-2015 00:00:01 1.2345
01-01-2015 00:00:15 3.1415
but unless formatting is changed in Base before copying, "Copy" will only copy the timestamp to the format chosen for SHOWING the data in the database: Time to the level of full minutes, numbers with two decimal places.
Whether this behaviour (copying truncating to the shown precision) is a bug or a feature depends on the viewpoint - or put another way, the current behaviour has both advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages: Copying a full table can mean copying a huge amount of data to the clipboard. And copying data with full precision can give a confusing result on insert in e.g. a text file.
Disadvantages: The user is not warned that "Copy" is a lossy copy. The behaviour is different from "Copy" in Calc, where data is copied in full precision regardless of formatting for showing. Finally, alternatives for copying with full precision may not be obvious to the user.
A solution to make everybody happy may be to have two versions of copy:
a) Rename the current behaviour to "Copy as shown". This makes it clear to the user that there may be data loss.
b) Implement copy to retain full precision. This can be called "Copy" or perhaps "Copy with full precision". This allows users like me to retain the full precision of the data when copying.
In the test file provided the field MyDouble is defined without any decimal places, and the values entered show up as 1.23 and 3.14 - is this what you intended ?
Build ID: 7556cbc6811c9d992f4064ab9287069087d7f62c
CPU threads: 4; OS: Mac OS X 10.12.6; UI render: default;
Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); Calc: group
Additionally, the timestamp field definition formatting is given as :
Is this also what you intended ?
Seems like bug 67763 is also relevant here.
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #1)
> In the test file provided the field MyDouble is defined without any decimal
> places, and the values entered show up as 1.23 and 3.14 - is this what you
> intended ?
Double could be 15 digits. There must not be defined any decimal-places. The field will save something like
The problem described by Lars Jødal is: The database will save all this (you could see this in the table-GUI when setting, for example, "MyDouble" to show 4 decimal-places), but data will only be copied with the precision you define in table-GUI, not which is defined for the database.
Note: the decimal-places won't be shown when copying the data through clipboard by Ctrl+C, but it will appear wen copying data by drag and drop into Calc. The same with the timestamp.
(In reply to robert from comment #4)
> (In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #1)
> > In the test file provided the field MyDouble is defined without any decimal
> > places, and the values entered show up as 1.23 and 3.14 - is this what you
> > intended ?
> Double could be 15 digits. There must not be defined any decimal-places. The
> field will save something like
> and also
> The problem described by Lars Jødal is: The database will save all this
> (you could see this in the table-GUI when setting, for example, "MyDouble"
> to show 4 decimal-places), but data will only be copied with the precision
> you define in table-GUI, not which is defined for the database.
Yes, this was my point. (So yes, it was intended to define the format to show less precision that is contained in the data.)
> Note: the decimal-places won't be shown when copying the data through
> clipboard by Ctrl+C, but it will appear wen copying data by drag and drop
> into Calc. The same with the timestamp.
Fine, drag-and-drop is one way to copy with full precision. But it may not be obvious to the user that Ctrl+C can be lossy (it took me some time to realize it).
Is the issue clear enough to change status from "NEEDINFO"?
If yes, what does people think of my suggestions to remedy the issue?
I have set this bug to NEW, because the bug appears when copying a table through clipboard. Don't know why there is a difference between copy/paste and drag and drop - but drag and drop will show the precision of the real data, not only the data, which is been shown in the table.
** Please read this message in its entirety before responding **
To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.
There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.
If you have time, please do the following:
Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/
If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
Please DO NOT
Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not
appropriate in this case)
If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/
2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword
Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa
Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!
This is still reproducible in
Build ID: 54c8cbb85f300ac59db32fe8a675ff7683cd5a16
Threads CPU : 8; OS : Mac OS X 10.13.6; UI Render : par défaut;
Locale : fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); Calc: group
Also reproducible in
Build ID: b9955b2083ffdc1f99bc8be6b09d806fa3279a16
CPU threads: 8; OS: Mac OS X 10.13.6; UI render: default;
Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); Calc: group
Still reproducible in:
Version: 188.8.131.52 (x64)
Build ID: 1ec314fa52f458adc18c4f025c545a4e8b22c159
CPU threads: 4; OS: Windows 10.0; UI render: GL; VCL: win;
Locale: da-DK (da_DK); UI-Language: en-GB
Also reproducible in:
Version: 184.108.40.206 (x64)
Build ID: 41ac97386aba908b6db860cfb4cfe2da871886ae
CPU tråde: 4; Styresystem: Windows 10.0; Gengiver af brugergrænseflade: GL; VCL: win;
Lokalisering: da-DK (da_DK); UI-Language: da-DK