Re: When is int32 not an int32?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: When is int32 not an int32?
Date: 2021-09-26 22:31:04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> writes:
> It claims that a test unexpected passes. That is, Test #31 is expected to fail, because it intentionally tests a version in which its parts overflow the int32[3] they’re stored in, with the expectation that one day we can refactor the type to handle larger version parts.

> I can’t imagine there would be any circumstance under which int32 would somehow be larger than a signed 32-bit integer, but perhaps there is?

I'd bet more along the lines of "your overflow check is less portable than
you thought".

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2021-09-26 22:36:00 Re: When is int32 not an int32?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-09-26 22:28:46 Re: Add create and update timestamp to all objects