Re: Checking for overflow of integer arithmetic - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Page
Subject Re: Checking for overflow of integer arithmetic
Date
Msg-id E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E430688C@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Checking for overflow of integer arithmetic  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: 03 October 2004 20:39
> To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: [HACKERS] Checking for overflow of integer arithmetic
>
> 2. For the int2 and int8 operators, should we stick to a
> one-size-fits-all message "integer out of range", or be more
> specific: "smallint out of range" and "bigint out of range"?
> The existing messages are not completely consistent about
> this.  I'm inclined to go with mentioning the specific type
> but I'm not dead set on it.

I vote for being more specific. A little extra info can sometimes ease
debugging problems no matter how trivial it seems.

Regards, Dave.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Checking for overflow of integer arithmetic
Next
From: Oleg Bartunov
Date:
Subject: slow count() was: tsearch2 poor performance