On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 1:12 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Yeah, I don't think this would create a performance problem, at least not
> if you're using a compiler that implements pg_sub_s64_overflow reasonably.
> (And if you're not, and this bugs you, the answer is to get a better
Please find attached the v2 of the said patch with the tests added. I
tested and it applies with all tests passing both on REL_14_STABLE,
REL_15_STABLE and master. I don't know how the decision on
backpatching is made and whether it makes sense here or not. If any
additional work is required, please let me know.
> By chance did you look at all other nearby cases, is it the only place
> with overflow?
Not really, no. The other place where it could overflow was in the
interval justification function and it was fixed about a year ago.
That wasn't backpatched afaict. See
https://postgr.es/m/CAAvxfHeNqsJ2xYFbPUf_8nNQUiJqkag04NW6aBQQ0dbZsxfWHA@mail.gmail.com
Regards,
Nick
