Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Richard Guo
Subject Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width
Date
Msg-id CAMbWs4-pYv=UkkdF_47w-a5OSgs5GQaZANib0YJc6mSp531Z5A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width
List pgsql-bugs

On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 12:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> writes:
> I agree with all the comments made.  I have also examined other places
> where the width field is assigned, and I think we've covered all cases.
> So the v3 patch is in good shape to me.

Thanks for looking!  Do you have an opinion about the int64-vs-double
question?

To be honest, I don't have a preference on which one is better.  I think
double is good enough for now as we don't need to worry about overflow
with it.

Thanks
Richard

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #18246: pgstathashindex() attempts to read invalid file for hash index attached to partitioned table