pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedint64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
Commits from this thread:
2019-11-09 a55018760d 30f6998ffc 18622caa37 Remove test case that doesn't work with --disable-integer-timestamps.
* int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps
@ 2019-11-09 17:06 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2019-11-09 21:57 ` Re: int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2019-11-09 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Commits a7145f6bc et al. added a test to verify integer overflow
detection in interval_mul. The buildfarm has now reminded me that
you're not going to get integer overflow if timestamps ain't integers,
cf
https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mandrill&dt=2019-11-08%2019%3A42%3A32
I think the most expedient answer is just to remove that test case
in the pre-v10 branches. It's already served its purpose by showing
that the rest of the buildfarm is OK. I'd work harder on this if
--disable-integer-timestamps were still a live option, but it's
hard to justify any complicated solution.
regards, tom lane
[ wanders away wondering if we should have more than one critter testing
--disable-integer-timestamps ]
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps
2019-11-09 17:06 int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
@ 2019-11-09 21:57 ` Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Andres Freund @ 2019-11-09 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Hi,
On 2019-11-09 12:06:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Commits a7145f6bc et al. added a test to verify integer overflow
> detection in interval_mul. The buildfarm has now reminded me that
> you're not going to get integer overflow if timestamps ain't integers,
> cf
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=mandrill&dt=2019-11-08%2019%3A42%3A32
>
> I think the most expedient answer is just to remove that test case
> in the pre-v10 branches. It's already served its purpose by showing
> that the rest of the buildfarm is OK. I'd work harder on this if
> --disable-integer-timestamps were still a live option, but it's
> hard to justify any complicated solution.
Makes sense to me.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-11-09 21:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-11-09 17:06 int64-timestamp-dependent test vs. --disable-integer-timestamps Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2019-11-09 21:57 ` Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox