On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 12:08:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> After a few minutes' thought, how about:
>
> Assert((uint64) blocknum + (uint64) nblocks <= (uint64) mdnblocks(reln, forknum));
>
> This'd stop being helpful if we ever widen BlockNumber to 64 bits,
> but I think that's unlikely. (Partitioning seems like a better answer
> for giant tables.)
No idea if this will happen or not, but that's not the only area where
we are going to need a native uint128 implementation to control the
overflows with uint64.
What you are suggesting is good enough for me, so I've applied on HEAD
a version using that.
--
Michael
