On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 2:38 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> So what I propose we do about this is to apply the attached to HEAD
> and leave the back branches alone.
+1. In most cases, we pride ourselves on carefully validating the
input we receive and people on this list have been known to disparage
other
Evgeniy Gorbanev reported to the security list that he'd found
a case where timestamp_in triggered an undefined-behavior
sanitizer warning, due to trying to store a float value larger
than INT_MAX into an integer variable. We concluded that there's
no real security issue there, it's just that the
