John Regehr <reg...@cs.utah.edu> writes: > On 08/02/2010 09:06 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> John: how did you detect this?
> One of my students has hacked Clang to detect integer undefined > behaviors in C, like this shift problem or signed overflows. Cool. > This was > the only problem that came up during a "make check" of a postgresql with > this checking turned on, which is pretty cool. Hrm, I'd have expected you to see a few integer overflows during the regression tests --- we do test that the overflow checks in places like int4pl work. You might be interested in this concurrent thread: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-08/msg00024.php particularly the comments about overflow. > I'd expect to be able to find more problems if I could get hold of a > good fuzz tester for postgresql, or at least some much larger test > inputs. Are there any of these you folks would suggest that I use? Yeah, the PG regression tests aren't amazingly good coverage-wise (although running the contrib tests as well as core helps --- did you do that?). I'm afraid I haven't got a good suggestion for you. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
