Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> It looks like timestamp[tz]_pl_interval() is not doing proper validation
> in all paths.
> Patch attached. I looked for other areas that might be affected, but
> none jumped out.
This seems to be adding a heck of a lot of cycles (viz, replacing a
simple int64 or float8 addition with timestamp2tm then tm2timestamp)
to fix a corner case that will probably not matter to anyone anytime
in the next 200 thousand years, give or take a few millenia. I'm okay
with the concept of detecting overflow here, but not at this price.
Can't we do a more direct overflow check, comparable to what ordinary
int64/float8 addition does?
Also, surely timestamp_mi_interval has got the identical issue, and
probably some other operators.
regards, tom lane
