public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]>
To: Baji Shaik <[email protected]>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: uuidv7 improperly accepts dates before 1970-01-01
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:18:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD21AoDAx5ArZ_Fpp1u6VmPS26GsqBB_PEaf9yF4U9U+fd3yBQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+fm-RN9UgAG2ew7T0Gum8RtZ4ZbyYvOLyyqAiuTWhsGEn3_zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+fm-RN4eMEr2tzZU_mAV-=WfdmPXJ4Ea_GpmSS8=yStSy8onQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAN4CZFP9XsTXijqxtK7v9Hgad3jQN-m+wBve0azdi3QkheJv7Q@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+fm-RPjp8fC-w50PApyhrfMqY4SA0zT5s1Nq=+03+ALcf+3+A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+fm-RN9UgAG2ew7T0Gum8RtZ4ZbyYvOLyyqAiuTWhsGEn3_zw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 6:47 AM Baji Shaik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 9:19 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> From a user's perspective, it seems sufficient to know that the
>> shifted timestamp falls outside the range supported by UUID v7. As a
>> translator, I'm not particularly enthusiastic about adding more
>> message variants when the distinction is not particularly useful to
>> users.
>
>
> Thanks for the feedback, Kyotaro. Good point. Attached v3 with all boundary checks
> using a single shared errdetail:
>
> "UUID version 7 supports timestamps from 1970-01-01 to approximately year 10889."
>
> 0001 - Reject infinite intervals
> 0002 - Reject pre-epoch timestamps (with overflow-safe epoch conversion)
> 0003 - Reject timestamps beyond the 48-bit limit
>
> I prefer keeping them as 3 patches since each addresses a distinct
> failure mode and is easier to review/bisect independently. That said,
> since 0002 and 0003 now share the same errdetail and are logically
> the same validation (timestamp outside valid range), I'm happy to
> merge them into one patch for v4 if preferred.
>
Thank you for updating the patch! I have one comment:
+ /*
+ * Convert a TimestampTz value back to a UNIX epoch timestamp. Use
+ * overflow-safe addition since large intervals can exceed int64 range.
+ */
+ if (pg_add_s64_overflow(ts,
+ (int64) (POSTGRES_EPOCH_JDATE - UNIX_EPOCH_JDATE) *
+ SECS_PER_DAY * USECS_PER_SEC,
+ &us))
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_DATETIME_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+ errmsg("timestamp out of range for UUID version 7"),
+ errdetail("UUID version 7 supports timestamps from
1970-01-01 to approximately year 10889.")));
It does the range validation on the Unix-epoch value, after converting
back from the shifted PostgreSQL-epoch timestamp. Can we compare
pre-compute the Unix-epoch timestamp resentable window in
PostgreSQL-epoch units against the shifted PostgreSQL-epoch timestamp
before converting it back to the Unix epoch? That way, we don't need
to worry about the overflow.
---
+ /* UUID v7 uses an unsigned 48-bit millisecond field; reject pre-epoch */
+ if (us < 0)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_DATETIME_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+ errmsg("timestamp out of range for UUID version 7"),
+ errdetail("UUID version 7 supports timestamps from
1970-01-01 to approximately year 10889.")));
+
+ /* Reject timestamps beyond the 48-bit millisecond field maximum */
+ if (us / US_PER_MS > (INT64CONST(1) << 48) - 1)
+ ereport(ERROR,
+ (errcode(ERRCODE_DATETIME_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+ errmsg("timestamp out of range for UUID version 7"),
+ errdetail("UUID version 7 supports timestamps from
1970-01-01 to approximately year 10889.")));
Let's merge these two if statements as they use the same error message.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
view thread (18+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: uuidv7 improperly accepts dates before 1970-01-01
In-Reply-To: <CAD21AoDAx5ArZ_Fpp1u6VmPS26GsqBB_PEaf9yF4U9U+fd3yBQ@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox