Re: [RFC] overflow checks optimized away

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Xi Wang <xi(dot)wang(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] overflow checks optimized away
Date: 2013-11-29 21:48:13
Message-ID: 17299.1385761693@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Also, one of the places GCC warns about optimizing away an overflow
> check (with -fno-wrapv) is inside the localtime.c file from the tz
> library. I fixed it in my patch but in fact I checked and it's already
> fixed upstream so I'm wondering whether you expect to merge in an
> updated tz library? Is there anything surprising about the process or
> do you just copy in the files? Would you be happy for someone else to
> do it?

We've made a number of changes in our copies, unfortunately. What you
have to do is look at the upstream diffs since we last synchronized
with them (which according to src/timezone/README was tzcode 2010c)
and merge those diffs as appropriate. It should be reasonably
mechanical, but don't forget to update the README.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2013-11-29 22:00:09 Re: MultiXact bugs
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-11-29 21:34:42 Re: MultiXact bugs