Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vitaly Burovoy
Subject Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check
Date
Msg-id CAKOSWNkwNBR42sEcbgpVfKEvWJ_HksxPY2UM_qCr9wPamv13=w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Integer overflow in timestamp[tz]_part() and date/time boundaries check
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/16/16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> So I fixed that up and committed it, with a very short set of new
> regression test cases.  I seriously doubt that the other ones add
> enough value to be worth trying to make them work in both float- and
> int-timestamp cases; though if you want to submit a new patch to
> add more test cases we could consider it.  My feeling about it is that
> that kind of testing does nothing for errors of omission (ie functions
> that fail to range-check their results), which is the most likely sort
> of bug here, and so I doubt it's worth adding them to regression tests
> that many people will run many times a day for a long time to come.
>
>             regards, tom lane

Thank you very much! If you decide such kind of tests is not
necessary, it is enough for me.

Is there any reason to leave JULIAN_MINDAY and JULIAN_MAXDAY which are
not used now?
Also why JULIAN_MAXMONTH is set to "6" whereas
{DATE|TIMESTAMP}_END_JULIAN use "1" as month?

-- 
Best regards,
Vitaly Burovoy



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error
Next
From: David Rowley
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Aggregate