exact same value stored twice in a field - storage issue?

[Frank_Kipry]

as you all know, every value per field is only stored/displayed once in Qlik Sense

Now, somehow, I good for multiple cases the issue, that identical values are being stored twice.

Here just one example:

as you can see, I already found the issue >> somehow, the exact same value (I already checked the original data source, there it's all correct, simply -140, no decimal)

for me it looks like a issue with the storage of the data, espcially since Floor(140,00000...0002) = 141

the code itself is nothing special.

Honestly, I am just baffeled, at this point it's just curiosity. 

[tresesco]

@Frank_Kipry , floor() working as expected for negative number, right?

[Frank_Kipry]

@tresesco you are right, the floor() is working fine, I forgot that it's negative.

but doesn't change the core-issue.

you can see it especially nicely with the two columns with the Pow(10,6) and Pow(10,7).

with Pow(10,7) it shows the 2, even though it should already be displayed with Pow(10,6).

also, this value -140 is just being inherited, there is no calculation or so involved.

[marcus_sommer]

The values aren't identically. Qlik has a binary number system which is limited to 14/15 digits - and the UI attempts to display all digits may not always be working as expected.

I suggest you applies the needed rounding already within the load in which you also may branch for various values, for example:

pick(sign(Field) + 2, ceil(Field), Field, floor(Field)) as Field

[Frank_Kipry]

@marcus_sommer oh I know that they are not identical, for me it's the curiosity how such a storage error could happen.

Because this value -140 is purely the result of the join of the other -140 (the second entry is one where I calculate the indirect cost rate, which is an additional column).

Like I wrote above, there is no calculating or so involved.

[marcus_sommer]

I don't think that there is a storage error else there there are two different values which are correctly stored. I'm not quite sure about the attempts to track these difference within the UI but could imagine that they are misleading and confusing in some way.

I would expect to see this result by adding a recno() + rowno() in the table-load from this field and then showing them within a table-box.