Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>, rekgrpth(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width
Date: 2023-12-19 04:08:57
Message-ID: 4150261.1702958937@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I agree with all the comments made. I have also examined other places
> where the width field is assigned, and I think we've covered all cases.
> So the v3 patch is in good shape to me.

Thanks for looking! Do you have an opinion about the int64-vs-double
question?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2023-12-19 05:53:59 Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width
Previous Message Richard Guo 2023-12-19 03:32:29 Re: BUG #18247: Integer overflow leads to negative width