Re: Numeric multiplication overflow errors

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Numeric multiplication overflow errors
Date: 2021-07-01 10:44:46
Message-ID: CAApHDvpHvR6GPDjDRCsRzAPmTN6ihc3-SqyBA7Ga3OiW7pNbrg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 22:03, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> One other thing I'm wondering about is back-patching. I was originally
> thinking of these as back-patchable bug fixes, but changing the binary
> format of the aggregate serialization states feels dodgy for a
> back-patch.

I was wondering about that too. I'm not sure if any extensions might
be using serial/deserial functions to communicate over multiple
servers. As far as I know, Citus does not do this and implements
aggregates like AVG(c) over multi-nodes with SUM(c) + COUNT(c). I'm
pretty sure Citus is not the only extension doing that kind of work.
So perhaps other people are using the serial/deserial functions.

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2021-07-01 10:47:57 Re: pgbench: INSERT workload, FK indexes, filler fix
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2021-07-01 10:28:08 Re: Teach pg_receivewal to use lz4 compression