| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: pgbench's expression parsing & negative numbers | 
| Date: | 2017-12-14 22:47:57 | 
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.20.1712142331140.5980@lancre | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Hello,
>>  - I do not think that updating pgbench arithmetic for managing integer
>>    overflows is worth Andres Freund time. My guess is that most
>>    script would not trigger client-side overflows, so the change would
>>    be a no-op in practice.
>
> It might not be if you view it in isolation (although I'm not
> convinced). The problem is that it has cost beyond pgbench. Due to
> pgbench's overflow handling
Lack of?
> I can't run make check on a build that has -ftrapv, which found several 
> bugs already.
Hmmm. You suggest that integer overflows do occur when running pgbench.
Indeed, this tap test case: "\set maxint debug(:minint - 1)"
Otherwise, some stat counters may overflow on very long runs? Although
overflowing a int64 takes some time...
> I'd be happy if somebody else would tackle the issue, but I don't quite 
> see it happening...
I must admit that it is not very high on my may-do list. I'll review it if 
it appears, though.
-- 
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chapman Flack | 2017-12-14 23:12:35 | Re: Would a BGW need shmem_access or database_connection to enumerate databases? | 
| Previous Message | Chapman Flack | 2017-12-14 22:41:24 | worker_spi example BGW code GUC tweak |