| From: | Prashant Chinnam <crprashant(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, surya poondla <suryapoondla4(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Takeshi Ideriha <iderihatakeshi(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Return INT_MAX or INT_MIN from strtoint() on overflow |
| Date: | 2026-10-30 02:28:20 |
| Message-ID: | SN7P223MB0600D5E6BEE08383ED96C875DD6D2@SN7P223MB0600.NAMP223.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tom,
>My thought here is to back-patch the strtoint() change.
>I cannot envision any case that that would make worse.
>And failing to do so leaves a land-mine for potential
>future back-patches of code using strtoint().
Thanks -- back-patching the strtoint() change removes my
only reason for preferring strtoi64() in patch [1]. Once
it has landed, I will switch that patch back to
strtoint(); that was the shape of my original v1, minus
the errno workaround that the saturating return value
makes unnecessary.
Regards,
Prashant Chinnam
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | shihao zhong | 2026-10-30 02:30:54 | Re: pg_upgrade doesn't copy ICU rules on template0 |
| Previous Message | shihao zhong | 2026-10-30 02:27:21 | Re: [PG19] pg_upgrade --check passes, then the upgrade fails |