| 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
| 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 |