>From the bugs I linked earlier, just creating a test table with a couple
of values that total > 2 billion will show the issue with sum().

Aaron

On Mon, 2007-02-19 at 21:31 -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> I don't know, and I'm not able to reproduce this anymore since my 
> mailbox is no longer big enough.  If anyone can create a reproduceable 
> test case, I'll bring it to the PostgreSQL mailing list (I hang out 
> there alot).
> 
> Matt
> 
> 
> Aaron Stone wrote:
> > Sure is. Big sigh of relief on the table definition. Now what might be
> > causing the sum() to be only 4 signed bytes if all of the columns
> > involved are 8 bytes!?
> > 
> > Aaron
> > 
> > On Sun, 2007-02-18 at 21:44 -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> >> I'm not sure what the problem is, but I don't think that's it.
> >>
> >> INT8 (or bigint) is an 8 byte integer in PG sql hence 64 bit number, so 
> >> I don't think that's the problem.
> >>
> >>
> >> Aaron Stone wrote:
> >>> PostgreSQL assigns the type of SUM to be the type of the column it is
> >>> aggregating over. Physmessage.messagesize is INT8, so there we go: we're
> >>> only getting a 32 bit signed value as the sum.
> >>>
> >>> I'll add an appropriate type cast to the sql fragments in db_get_sql for
> >>> dbpgsql.c, a dummy in dbmysql.c, and look up how SQLite handles this
> >>> data type issue.
> >>>
> >>> There are actually five places in db.c where a sum is taken over
> >>> physmessage.messagesize, but I think the only negative effect is to
> >>> disable quota checks on mailboxes above 2GB.
> >>>
> >>> Aaron
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 23:54 -0800, Aaron Stone wrote:
> >>>> http://www.linuxforums.org/forum/linux-programming-scripting/54312-postgresql-sum-overflow-error.html
> >>>>
> >>>> You're on PostgreSQL, right? I wonder if someone has narrowed this
> >>>> report down to either a bug or a subtlty of the column type?
> >>>>
> >>>> Aaron
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 13:21 -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> >>>>> Unfortunately in the interim I have deleted a lot of messages from my 
> >>>>> account and now after I run dbmail-util the curmail_size value is again 
> >>>>> positive.  I assume this is because I now have less than 2G in the 
> >>>>> matthew account.  So I do think there is an issue here somewhere, sorry 
> >>>>> I'm not able to help more at the moment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Matt
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Paul J Stevens wrote:
> >>>>>> Running 'dbmail-util -py' at trace_level=5 should reveal what's going 
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> here.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Aaron Stone wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 00:29 -0500, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I was looking at dbmail_users today and noticed this:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>  user_idnr |             userid             | curmail_size
> >>>>>>>> -----------+--------------------------------+--------------
> >>>>>>>>          4 | matthew                        |  -1886517308
> >>>>>>> That's interesting (to say the least :-P). Internally we've got a 
> >>>>>>> u64_t;
> >>>>>>> I wonder if that's just coming into DBMail as a high 64 bit number or 
> >>>>>>> if
> >>>>>>> something is really screwed up.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Aaron
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> >>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>         
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> >>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> >>>> [email protected]
> >>>> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dbmail-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Dbmail-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev

_______________________________________________
Dbmail-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://twister.fastxs.net/mailman/listinfo/dbmail-dev

Reply via email to