Re: int8 & INT64_IS_BUSTED - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: int8 & INT64_IS_BUSTED
Date
Msg-id 12853.1188429713@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: int8 & INT64_IS_BUSTED  ("Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org> writes:
> I still think int8mul is buggy. It calculates result as arg1 * arg2, and then
> checks for an overflow by dividing again, and seeing if the right answer
> comes out. Which sounds good. But it *skips* that check if both arguments
> fit into an int32 - check is
> (arg1 == (int64) ((int32) arg1) && arg2 == (int64) ((int32) arg2)).

Good point --- we should probably #ifdef out that part for
INT64_IS_BUSTED.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Representation of ResourceOwnerIds (transient XIDs) in system views (lazy xid assignment)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is there a tsquery data type?