Re: int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps
Date
Msg-id 20191109215758.ikr7xpin4kvohtxd@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2019-11-09 12:06:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Commits a7145f6bc et al. added a test to verify integer overflow
> detection in interval_mul.  The buildfarm has now reminded me that
> you're not going to get integer overflow if timestamps ain't integers,
> cf
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mandrill&dt=2019-11-08%2019%3A42%3A32
> 
> I think the most expedient answer is just to remove that test case
> in the pre-v10 branches.  It's already served its purpose by showing
> that the rest of the buildfarm is OK.  I'd work harder on this if
> --disable-integer-timestamps were still a live option, but it's
> hard to justify any complicated solution.

Makes sense to me.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: logical replication empty transactions
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Handy describe_pg_lock function