Re: Silent overflow of interval type

Nick Babadzhanian <pgnickb(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Please find attached the v2 of the said patch with the tests added.

Pushed with light editing (for instance, I don't think interval.sql
is the place to test timestamp operators, even if the result is an
interval).

> I don't know how the decision on
> backpatching is made and whether it makes sense here or not.

We haven't got a really hard policy on that, but in this case
I elected not to, because it didn't seem worth the effort.
It seems fairly unlikely that people would hit this in production.
Also there's the precedent that related changes weren't backpatched.

regards, tom lane