Re: cash_mul_int8 / cash_div_int8

From: Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
To: PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: cash_mul_int8 / cash_div_int8
Date: 2015-10-07 15:11:29
Message-ID: CADyhKSWrqM3MCCEBgbWocSmK5Xkvww9rkxD9JcVjUL=B9rf0rw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Also, cash_pl, cash_mi, cash_mul_int4 and so on... does not have overflow checks
like as int8pl has.

Of course, most of people don't need to worry about 64bit overflow for
money... :-).

2015-10-08 0:03 GMT+09:00 Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>:
> I noticed cash_mul_int8 / cash_div_int8 are defined in cash.c,
> however, pg_proc.h and pg_operator.h contains no relevant entries.
>
> Is it just a careless oversight?
>
> Thanks,
> --
> KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>

--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Euler Taveira 2015-10-07 15:18:52 Re: Small documentation fix in src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/po/pt_BR.po
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-10-07 15:09:30 Re: cash_mul_int8 / cash_div_int8