On 02/09/2026 07:42, Chao Li wrote: > > >> On Sep 1, 2026, at 16:22, Andrei Lepikhov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 01/09/2026 09:35, Chao Li wrote: >>> If newval is negative, the minus operation may also overflow. >> I don't think that's the case. An inverted function removes values that were >> already included in the aggregate, which usually brings the total closer to >> zero >> instead of pushing it toward the boundary. From what I see, this means >> there's >> no risk of integer overflow. > I agree that this may not happen during normal aggregate execution, but > int2_avg_accum_inv() is also directly callable as a SQL function.
In my mind, we should pay for CPU cycles only in practical cases. So, if this case deserves an overflow check, it should be an assertion that consumes no resources in production. -- regards, Andrei Lepikhov, pgEdge
