| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps |
| Date: | 2019-11-09 21:57:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20191109215758.ikr7xpin4kvohtxd@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2019-11-09 12:06:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Commits a7145f6bc et al. added a test to verify integer overflow
> detection in interval_mul. The buildfarm has now reminded me that
> you're not going to get integer overflow if timestamps ain't integers,
> cf
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mandrill&dt=2019-11-08%2019%3A42%3A32
>
> I think the most expedient answer is just to remove that test case
> in the pre-v10 branches. It's already served its purpose by showing
> that the rest of the buildfarm is OK. I'd work harder on this if
> --disable-integer-timestamps were still a live option, but it's
> hard to justify any complicated solution.
Makes sense to me.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-11-09 22:09:39 | Re: Handy describe_pg_lock function |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2019-11-09 21:28:15 | Re: logical replication empty transactions |