Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1nb2PZ-0008O4-S3
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2022 15:45:05 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1nb2PY-0003kq-Ny
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2022 15:45:04 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1nb2PY-0003kh-Ev
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2022 15:45:04 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1nb2PW-0002ll-JU
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 03 Apr 2022 15:45:04 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 233FiwSg1640461;
	Sun, 3 Apr 2022 11:44:58 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Joseph Koshakow <koshy44@gmail.com>
cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Fix overflow in DecodeInterval
In-reply-to: <CAAvxfHcKD3FGw6AseTLqMtwoY4a=rmCR6AXQ997Av611yrSbrA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAvxfHff0JLYHwyBrtMx_=6wr=k2Xp+D+-X3vEhHjJYMj+mQcg@mail.gmail.com> <2176379.1644612942@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAAvxfHd-DZzRC9wROFbsZq=8zK+R-5G7DAoZ-oUK8n09cGA0eA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHddHqA=dDKrbi+d+vo52j=sUwVt6_PYOsJGo+Eq91v4=g@mail.gmail.com> <20220213035150.wusl6mmbeb3m3jpy@alap3.anarazel.de> <CAAvxfHdrQc8pVoSnTPBfTKzHQzmYTg1qheNxMLoWDcrWpTJapg@mail.gmail.com> <20220213203037.ie7bgjrodupzxhda@alap3.anarazel.de> <2726280.1644784719@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAAvxfHd3gsOkGsbu5AVG+ayHiqsWzuZsi8WknL7v4C_A_4TwOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHeNNjsJarnzVOycP__T2x4iwbbSWBDaDePcuBjz8--x6Q@mail.gmail.com> <20220215162809.yryv7bj24lxfoo37@alap3.anarazel.de> <CAAvxfHfKYHw8n19s7eAcDo_B2T1SS22O1p0X4OE5_WBK230O+Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHduBhZdUXLFwLOSGW=0c17frLojcbCqNsZrw5n73pekZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHdVaHrriTWyvsLg3POX13rOyUGysur59sOT02qmmTq0Rg@mail.gmail.com> <410974.1645400227@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAAvxfHdQGiX2xC78y3Y_LTdCiTOWtMXkaLai7s7-mG+=H7qNXA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHdC-A3-F31xHiE06oiFg!
 NFM5qrkK0TD9WH0ZKCMFJ=B+w@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHd730o24gGhu5YoL1Sxt0B=KfoL5aq5uttufjqLEiKitA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHdM_8rhBP+GLj_9rSHswjBESztrxEV+GrTvXv9fAnBUfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAvxfHecFFqpn=5H0T3N1Bki=rkgW0BmRNOZ1NZdKDMCOoy+Rw@mail.gmail.com> <1523458.1648926618@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAAvxfHf8mXDaCjHmvDHNcKw8o8+cBOHiB+nE5ea9_a-1oiVS0Q@mail.gmail.com> <1531188.1648930455@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1592893.1648969747@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAAvxfHcKD3FGw6AseTLqMtwoY4a=rmCR6AXQ997Av611yrSbrA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Joseph Koshakow <koshy44@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sun, 03 Apr 2022 11:23:07 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1640459.1649000698.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2022 11:44:58 -0400
Message-ID: <1640460.1649000698@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-hackers.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1640460.1649000698%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Joseph Koshakow <koshy44@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 3:09 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Hmm ... buildfarm's not entirely happy [1][2][3]:

> I think I know that the issue is. It's with `ParseISO8601Number` and
> the minutes field "1.".
> Previously that function parsed the entire field into a single double,
> so "1." would
> be parsed into 1.0. Now we try to parse the integer and decimal parts
> separately. So
> we first parse "1" into 1 and then fail to "." into anything because
> it's not a valid decimal.

Interesting point, but then why doesn't it fail everywhere?

			regards, tom lane