Re: plpgsql FOR loop doesn't guard against strange step values

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: plpgsql FOR loop doesn't guard against strange step values
Date: 2007-07-17 13:27:46
Message-ID: 20942.1184678866@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Jaime Casanova" <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-07/msg00142.php
> at least the part that prevents overflow and probably the one that
> reject zero in BY are clearly bugs and should be backpatched to 8.2,
> aren't they?

Well, it's a behavioral change, so given the lack of complaints from the
field I'm inclined not to back-patch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-07-17 13:31:25 Re: Earlier suggestion to get gcov to work by adding $(CFLAGS) to module link line
Previous Message ohp 2007-07-17 13:19:29 Backend memory growing too much