Re: Bug in tm2timestamp

Tom Lane wrote:

> BTW, it strikes me that it's a bit silly to go to all this effort
> here, and then ignore the possibility of overflow in the dt2local
> adjustment just below.  But we'd have to change the API of that
> function, which I don't especially feel like doing right now.

Another point worth considering is that most of this is duplicated by
ecpg's libpgtypes.  Do we want to fix that one too, or do we just let it
continue to be broken?  I note that other bugs are already unfixed in
ecpg's copy.  One other idea to consider is moving these things to
src/common, so we would have a single implementation.  I already have a
patch that implements most of that, but it's only 90% there because it's
missing support for some things that the current code manipulates as
global variables (via GUC), and I didn't want to waste more time fixing
that.  AFAICS it's just a SMOP, though, but I had postponed that whole
effort to the 9.4 cycle to avoid stalling 9.3 even longer.

But in light of this bug and other already fixed date/time bugs, perhaps
it's warranted?  Opinions please.

--
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services