On Wed, 25 Mar 2026 at 13:31, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> Obviously, we don't want to back-patch anything that would cause a
> user-visible change in the return value of hash_numeric(), so I've
> been experimenting to see if there's any way to get PostgreSQL to
> output any value from hash_numeric() larger than 2^31 and I've been
> unable to. I tried:
I was experimenting with a less risky fix by having the datum_image
functions force the sign-extended representation of the Datum before
hashing or comparing.
Attached is a quick PoC of what that would look like. It does fix the
reported problem. But it is a hack and doesn't fix the root cause of
the issue.
Despite the hackiness, I feel this might be better than the
whack-a-mole approach of just fixing incorrect usages of the
PG_RETURN_* macros as and when we find them.
David
