Re: Wrong results from in_range() tests with infinite offset

From: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Wrong results from in_range() tests with infinite offset
Date: 2020-07-21 08:06:09
Message-ID: CAEZATCVqeHyLHSRdk=9aONBYSNkgaOH+_Wo-NEfMKg0xPmpdpA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 03:06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Pushed, but I chickened out of back-patching. The improvement in what
> happens for finite comparison values seems somewhat counterbalanced by
> the possibility that someone might not like the definition we arrived
> at for infinities. So, it's not quite an open-and-shut bug fix, so
> I just put it in HEAD (for now anyway).
>

Yeah, that seems fair enough, and it's quite an obscure corner-case
that has gone unnoticed for quite some time.

Regards,
Dean

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message kato-sho@fujitsu.com 2020-07-21 08:24:49 RE: Performing partition pruning using row value
Previous Message @usernamedt 2020-07-21 07:51:56 WAL segment switch on pg_start_backup()