Hi,
On 2018-09-26 22:38:41 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > > +"9223372036854775808" {
> > > + /* yuk: special handling for minint */
> > > + return MAXINT_PLUS_ONE_CONST;
> > > + }
> >
> > Yikes, do we really
Hello Andres,
+"9223372036854775808" {
+ /* yuk: special handling for minint */
+ return MAXINT_PLUS_ONE_CONST;
+ }
Yikes, do we really need this? If we dealt with - in the lexer, we
sh
Hi,
On 2018-08-10 10:24:29 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> diff --git a/src/bin/pgbench/exprscan.l b/src/bin/pgbench/exprscan.l
> index 5c1bd88128..e8faea3857 100644
> --- a/src/bin/pgbench/exprscan.l
> +++ b/src/bin/pgbench/exprscan.l
> @@ -191,16 +191,26 @@ notnull [Nn][Oo][Tt][Nn]
Hi,
On 2018-08-16 17:28:06 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
>
> Ok, thanks. Let's see what committers think about it.
>
> Andres, are you still interested in overflow detection and handling?
Yes. I'll try to look at it at some point not too f
Hello Ibrar,
The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
Ok, thanks. Let's see what committers think about it.
Andres, are you still interested in overflow detection and handling?
--
Fabien.
Patch is good to go from my side.
The new status of this patch is: Ready for Committer
Hello,
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:not tested
Patch does not apply cleanly on the master branch, anyways
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: not tested
Implements feature: tested, passed
Spec compliant: tested, passed
Documentation:not tested
Patch does not apply cleanly on the master branch, anyways I managed
I'll come up with a patch for that sometime soon.
ISTM that you have not sent any patch on the subject, otherwise I would
have reviewed it. Maybe I could do one some time later, unless you think
that I should not.
Here is a patch which detects pgbench overflows on int & double constants,
Hello Andres,
I'll come up with a patch for that sometime soon.
ISTM that you have not sent any patch on the subject, otherwise I would
have reviewed it. Maybe I could do one some time later, unless you think
that I should not.
Here is a patch which detects pgbench overflows on int & doub
Hello Andres,
working on overflow correctness in pg I noticed that pgbench isn't quite
there.
Indeed.
I assume it won't matter terribly often, but the way it parses integers
makes it incorrect for, at least, the negativemost number. [...] but
that unfortunately means that the sign is no in
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 (althoug
Hi,
On 2017-12-14 10:41:04 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> - 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.
Hello Andres,
There are some overflow checking with div and double to int cast, which were
added because of previous complaints, but which are not very useful to me.
I think handling it inconsistently is the worst of all worlds.
Hmmm... I cannot say that inconsistency is a good thing, that
On 2017-12-12 07:21:21 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello Andres,
>
> > working on overflow correctness in pg I noticed that pgbench isn't quite
> > there. I assume it won't matter terribly often, but the way it parses
> > integers makes it incorrect for, at least, the negativemost number.
>
Hello Andres,
working on overflow correctness in pg I noticed that pgbench isn't quite
there. I assume it won't matter terribly often, but the way it parses
integers makes it incorrect for, at least, the negativemost number.
It directly parses the integer input using:
{digit}+
Hi,
working on overflow correctness in pg I noticed that pgbench isn't quite
there. I assume it won't matter terribly often, but the way it parses
integers makes it incorrect for, at least, the negativemost number.
It directly parses the integer input using:
{digit}+{
17 matches
Mail list logo
