| From: | Xiong He <iihero(at)qq(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mike Christensen <mike(at)kitchenpc(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Is this a Postgres Bug? |
| Date: | 2012-08-05 09:13:09 |
| Message-ID: | tencent_43286FFA6A5C2EDA06BC850D@qq.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Seems this is not a bug.
Although 32767 doesn't exceed the 2bit int range.
But (32767 + 10) exceed the signed 2bit int range.
If you want to add index for the sum of the 2 columns, why don't you add a new column with a larger range (int32) ?
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Mike Christensen"<mike(at)kitchenpc(dot)com>;
Date: Sun, Aug 5, 2012 01:14 PM
To: "pgsql-general"<pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>;
Subject: [GENERAL] Is this a Postgres Bug?
First off, I've posted this question on StackOverflow in case anyone
wants to answer it:
The repro can be found here: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!1/734d7/1
I'm happy to log this as a bug, unless someone can explain to me why
this behavior is by design. Thanks!
Mike
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2012-08-05 12:29:07 | Re: Is this a Postgres Bug? |
| Previous Message | Mike Christensen | 2012-08-05 05:14:06 | Is this a Postgres Bug? |