Horton

Re: Missing SIZE_MAX

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-09-01T16:49:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> [ warning: more than you really wanted to know ahead ]

> It might be worth the effort to clean all of this up, just because the
> next person who gets bitten by it may not be as smart as you are.

Yeah.  I was just thinking that maybe the appropriate investment of
effort is to make [U]INT64CONST smarter, so that it results in a
properly-suffixed constant and doesn't need a cast.  Then it'd be a
lot easier to make these other macros be #if-safe.

Or we could just recast the test in fe-exec.c to not use SIZE_MAX.
Checking whether "SIZEOF_SIZE_T == 4" would really have the same
effect, though it's uglier.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Make [U]INT64CONST safe for use in #if conditions.

  2. Ensure SIZE_MAX can be used throughout our code.

  3. Teach libpq to detect integer overflow in the row count of a PGresult.