On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On 2017-12-12 16:47:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: >> Really? We've got test cases that intentionally exercise overflow >> in the money code? I think we could just drop such tests, until >> such time as someone fixes the issue. > > Some parts at least (input & output), I think it's easy enough to fix > those up.
There could be two ways to fix that: 1) Call the int8 equivalents with DirectFunctionCall2 and rely on the overflow there, but this has a performance impact. 2) Add similar checks as in int8.c, which feels like duplicating code but those are cheap. You are heading to 2) I guess? >> (OTOH, I bet we could drop reltime/abstime without too many complaints. >> Y2038 is coming.) > > I'm actually about to send a patch doing so, that code is one mess WRT > overflow handling. Agreed. I think as well that those should be fixed. It does not seem much complicated to fix them. -- Michael
