From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #18240: Undefined behaviour in cash_mul_flt8() and friends |
Date: | 2023-12-12 09:03:43 |
Message-ID: | ZXgh74Ykj3iWvXKr@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:05:53AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, approximately none of cash.c pays any attention to the risks
> of overflow/underflow. Improving that situation would be a good
> finger exercise for some aspiring hacker, perhaps. Although I bet
> somebody will ask again why it is that we continue to support the
> money type.
AFAIK, we discourage the use of money in the wiki for quite a few
years:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Don%27t_Do_This#Don.27t_use_money
And numeric has much better code coverage and support. I am wondering
whether we've reached the point where it would be better to remove it
entirely from the tree, and just tell people to use numeric. This has
a cost for upgrades, where we should cross check for its use but there
is already check_for_data_type_usage() to do this job so the facility
is there.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Edouard Tollet | 2023-12-12 09:33:27 | Issue with pg_get_functiondef |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-12-12 08:57:01 | Re: BUG #18241: PushTransaction may cause Standby to execute ItemIdMarkDead |