From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |
Date: | 2016-02-02 04:24:58 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZhEKva7wcoZwm6AUkz+CxUMB4UMoqVkVVQd2uMehB1pA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 9:46 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 7:36 AM, Michael Paquier
>> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>>>> + /* overflow check (needed for INT64_MIN) */
>>>> + if (lval != 0 && (*retval < 0 == lval < 0))
>>>>
>>>> Why not use "if (lval == INT64_MIN)" instead of this complicated condition?
>>>> If it is really needed for some reason, I think that a comment could help.
>>>
>>> Checking for PG_INT64_MIN only would be fine as well, so let's do so.
>>> I thought honestly that we had better check if the result and the left
>>> argument are not of the same sign, but well.
>>
>> Committed and back-patched to 9.5. Doesn't apply further back.
>
> OK, here are patches for 9.1~9.4. The main differences are that in
> 9.3/9.4 int64 is used for the division operations, and in 9.2/9.1
> that's int32. In the latter case pgbench blows up the same way with
> that:
> \set i -2147483648
> \set i :i / -1
> select :i;
> In those patches INT32_MIN/INT64_MIN need to be explicitly set as well
> at the top of pgbench.c. I thing that's fine.
Oh, gosh, I should have said more clearly that I didn't really see a
need to fix this all the way back. But I guess we could.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-02-02 04:35:37 | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-02-02 04:23:03 | Re: PostgreSQL Audit Extension |